My first poll for the NZ public

[Madness]

This gives me the shits.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10887742


A land banking business with a big piece of residentially zoned real estate on Auckland's outskirts has made more than $6 million a year for almost two decades - doing nothing. QV records shows Yi Huang Trading Company owns 39 Flat Bush School Rd, which it bought in 1995 for $890,000. Now, this 29ha block is listed on the market for $112.6 million, promoted as "the land of opportunity, vacant but close to Barry Curtis Park".

[bogan]

It does come back to someone, but preferably a few at the top calling the shots... but those people will be "experts" in their fields, so won't be calling the shots over everything (unlike today's moneymen). Randomly selected people from the community, yup, I'm good with that and in regards to the differing morals, there should be some form of simple criteria... along the lines of, did they endanger anyone else, was what they did detrimental to the community, did they cause real harm (not just offending someone) to an individual, measures that are relatively moral free. Consistent justice is going to be a nightmare, but with any luck people would be reasonable enough that sentencing could be for the crime that was committed as the community can take the character of the person etc... into consideration. Not flawless or perfect, but probably the best we could expect?

We currently work in some shit jobs for shit pay leaving us in shit conditions, so this comes back to are you prepared to do X for your community. Tis part of the reason I mentioned that we'd have more than 1 person to any job. That offers the potential to roster/rotate the workforce around jobs, potentially doing 1 two hour day in the sewer, 1 four hour day on the bins, 5 days off. Who knows, but as more and more people become available due to the measured jobs cull, more and more options can open up to share the shit jobs across the community.

As an example, I'm a computer programmer. My job will be culled. The reason being that there are too many programmers in the country and the majority are working on similar software for different company's. Part of the country job restructure is the standardisation of development languages, or at least the creation of a set of business system interfaces that will allow ALL of our systems to communicate. What do I do? 1 three hour day tending the veggie gardens in the two streets in my area with 10 other people. 1 four hour day on the bins with 4 other people. 1 six hour day walking the farmers fields picking weeds (instead of spraying chemicals) with 50 other people, 1 six hour day transporting food/seed/fertilizer to wherever it needs to go (2 hours) all by myself, 1 hour doing the school bus run and 3 hours squirting oil on the joints of the de-dagging machine with the mechanic laughing at me whilst reading his porn mag. 3 days off. All this time I am also available to provide support for the country's applications should I be needed. As my life plows on, I perform a raft of different jobs and at some point I suddenly have a calling to be a Dr. I train for 7 years and pass well. I now work 3 six hour days as a Dr, the 1 day walking the fields coz I like it and the 1 day doing the veggies or bins as cover, or just because I can and feel like it. Blah blah blah blah blah...

I remain unconvinced about the volume of work done in such a system, vs the volume needed for all the things you expect.


This gives me the shits.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10887742

Damn, that is a good rate of return!

Cunts.

[avgas]

This gives me the shits.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10887742
I bet he gets under half of what he want. The land there is not worth 900K a section yet, and he is not selling 112 sections so they have to get subdivision consent on a massive scale. Give it a few years.
10 years ago, Sylvia park was a bunch of car yards, a farm and some industry (mainly Rakon). Whomever owns the farm must have a long term plan - he would be getting a cool $1m (avg) a year by just selling one section on the fringe. One-by-one he will make a good $200m.

[mashman]

I remain unconvinced about the volume of work done in such a system, vs the volume needed for all the things you expect

Fair enough. How many people work in the finance industry do ya reckon? Including the finance/accounts departments of company's? How many business functions could be automated and how many programmers/project managers/business analysts does that release? How many jobs can be replace by "robots"? How many lawyers are going to be out of work? How many police? How many other jobs really aren't needed? So I'm gonna stay on the confident side of enough people being available to do the work that is needed, if not only because of the above, but because the jobs that need to be done are already being done.

[avgas]

Really? So there are at least 7 billion CEO roles that command a salary of over $1 million per annum?
Certainly - there a 100 billion startups that haven't started - say 7% are successes, that is a self made market for your CEO's

[mashman]

This gives me the shits.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10887742

Meh. Land grabbing is big business, just ask the farmers in Africa who are having "their" land sold from underneath them. It happens to everyone at some point. Tis shit though.

Something else that kind of irks me (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_expensive_paintings)

[mashman]

Certainly - there a 100 billion startups that haven't started - say 7% are successes, that is a self made market for your CEO's

heh... That'll keep the bankers busy fervently printing one's and zero's

[avgas]

heh... That'll keep the bankers busy fervently printing one's and zero's
Bankers don't exist anymore. Its all machines now.
The only intelligence in the whole place is the algorithm built by Quarks - who ironically are very nice and very intelligent people.

Don't let the governments know though.......they haven't figured that part out yet and think they can rescue the economy by feeding it money.

[SMOKEU]

Yeh, I'm not a fan of sharemarkets for the artificial manipulations to the value of things. And this seems even worse as it's completely artificial, there is no inherent value in a BTC, what is to stop everyone just going fuck this, its getting too hard to mine them, sell what we have, thus further devaluing it below the cost of mining them.

Well, conventional money isn't backed up by anything other than what the government says it's worth. If the government is in huge debt and doesn't have anything to show for it then how can you trust that either?

For the potentially big gains to be obtained from Bitcoin, you have to be prepared to take the risk. Higher risk usually = higher gains. Even with very high difficulty rates, there are always people who have the hardware and just "mine it out". An example of this occurred after the big market crash of June 2011 when the value plummeted around tenfold in a matter of days. There was a noticeable drop in the network hash rate, but only around a 30% reduction from memory (I can't find the exact figure), yet most of the hardcore miners still continued mining. Bitcoin is exponentially bigger than it was then, and the growth keeps continuing. There is simply too much money invested in it for it to fall over completely in the forseeable future.

[bogan]

Well, conventional money isn't backed up by anything other than what the government says it's worth. If the government is in huge debt and doesn't have anything to show for it then how can you trust that either?

For the potentially big gains to be obtained from Bitcoin, you have to be prepared to take the risk. Higher risk usually = higher gains. Even with very high difficulty rates, there are always people who have the hardware and just "mine it out". An example of this occurred after the big market crash of June 2011 when the value plummeted around tenfold in a matter of days. There was a noticeable drop in the network hash rate, but only around a 30% reduction from memory (I can't find the exact figure), yet most of the hardcore miners still continued mining. Bitcoin is exponentially bigger than it was then, and the growth keeps continuing. There is simply too much money invested in it for it to fall over completely in the forseeable future.

Conventional money is backed by what the market says it is worth, not the government; as was explained to mashman earlier, the government can affect it only so mcuh.

But there won't be, eventually the difficulty rate will be infinite as there are no more coins left to mine. What happens then? If it is destined for a crash at that point, why would the smart ones wait until then? The thing about a market crash, is it doesn't matter how much money is in it, but how much money is pulled out. BTC is not tied to any economy or anything of physical value, so I don't see why it would recover after a massive crash.

[SMOKEU]

Conventional money is backed by what the market says it is worth, not the government; as was explained to mashman earlier, the government can affect it only so mcuh.

But there won't be, eventually the difficulty rate will be infinite as there are no more coins left to mine. What happens then? If it is destined for a crash at that point, why would the smart ones wait until then? The thing about a market crash, is it doesn't matter how much money is in it, but how much money is pulled out. BTC is not tied to any economy or anything of physical value, so I don't see why it would recover after a massive crash.

The Bitcoin project is estimated to continue until well into the next century by design. This is because the difficulty will keep increasing up to the point that even very powerful hardware will only mine a tiny fraction of a BTC a day. The block reward also halves at certain intervals (currently it's 25BTC), further decreasing the payout.

I also don't know what's going to happen in the long term, one can only speculate.

[bogan]

The Bitcoin project is estimated to continue until well into the next century by design. This is because the difficulty will keep increasing up to the point that even very powerful hardware will only mine a tiny fraction of a BTC a day. The block reward also halves at certain intervals (currently it's 25BTC), further decreasing the payout.

I also don't know what's going to happen in the long term, one can only speculate.

As you say, the difficulty will increase so much that unless the BTC worth increases similarly, mining coins will no longer be cost effective. And I'm fairly certain the BTC value will not follow the difficulty increase once it gets up to ridiculously high levels. At that point the system will have to rely on its ability to process transactions to maintain or increase the BTC's worth. But there are hardware and infrastructure limitations to how many BTC transaction can be processed, add to that a decline in computing power from the miner's hashing the transactions, and my opinion is the bubble will burst.

We can't know what is going to happen long term, but the downsides certainly stack up during speculation.

[mashman]

Bankers don't exist anymore. Its all machines now.
The only intelligence in the whole place is the algorithm built by Quarks - who ironically are very nice and very intelligent people.

Don't let the governments know though.......they haven't figured that part out yet and think they can rescue the economy by feeding it money.

Someone has to read the really really tricky reports and then decide that the computer is right.

Yeah right, like the govt would pay attention anyway. They do as the bankers tell them to.

[oldrider]

True wealth is the countries ability to produce goods and services. GNP. (Gross national product)

The only reason for producing goods and services is that it be consumed. GNI (gross national income)

Money (the monitory system) is only required to facilitate consumption.

Everything that exists today, banks etc, are very proficient at that task.

With GNP at 100% of cost there has to be GNI of that equivalent to consume GNP.

Unfortunately there is never that much money (GNI) generated by creating the GNP to enable it to be consumed.

The difference is the amount of new money created and injected into the system to enable consumption to take place.

Currently the banks "create" that difference by lending "new money" as an interest bearing debt at a ratio of 10:1.

I.E. You offer them hard earned collateral (real money) and on the basis of that collateral, $1:00 they will "create" $9:00 more.

Your collateral $1:00 is real hard earned value, their $9:00 is nothing but a book entry and you are required to pay interest on the whole $10:00.

That is the fundamental flaw in current system, the difference between GNP and GNI is created every day as a social debt, rather than a social credit!

It is called social only because that part of monetary system belongs to the nation "NOT" to the "private" banks!

The banks should be required to apply for that credit from the reserve bank and the reserve bank should be in control of that process for the nation.

The private banks (who actually do a good job otherwise) are making a killing at our expense and charging the taxpayers and the government it's self for the privilege!

The debt imposed upon the new money gradually widens the difference between GNP and GNI until it gets to breaking point which results in a depression!

I.E. The shops etc are full of produce and everybody is starving because there is no money available to consume it.

The government is dysfunctional because treasury is broke and loaded down with debt! Industry is at a standstill, unemployment is rife!

Boom times are over, nothing left to do but to start a war some place and the banks will start it all over again by financing it at less than %1.

Wars booms and bust, wars booms and bust coupled with sudden inspirations for draconian austerity measures being miraculously engineered by the banking system!

Don't take my word for it though just make few references to recorded history and there it is for all the world to see ... ah but will they see?

That is the question! :thud:

[Ocean1]

So what do you propose you do with the failures?

So, to paraphrase: Waa, waah, I don't want to work hard enough to earn the good life. I want to change the rules so that everyone can have what they want without having to work for it. Waah waa.

That about cover it?

[gwigs]

So, to paraphrase: Waa, waah, I don't want to work hard enough to earn the good life. I want to change the rules so that everyone can have what they want without having to work for it. Waah waa.

That about cover it?
Working hard , so last century...

[Woodman]

So, to paraphrase: Waa, waah, I don't want to work hard enough to earn the good life. I want to change the rules so that everyone can have what they want without having to work for it. Waah waa.

That about cover it?

Yup, where is the incentive? Who is going to make sure everyone pulls their weight?

It will be a fuck up.

[Ocean1]

Working hard , so last century...

I suspect that if you had to work as hard as your grandaddy did you'd damned soon decide your life wasn't so bad after all.

[gwigs]

I suspect that if you had to work as hard as your grandaddy did you'd damned soon decide your life wasn't so bad after all.

I have worked hard all my life and I,ll bet I,ve worked harder than you in one year than you have in your whole life,I,m talking physical work not behind a pen..and worked just as hard as my Grandad
Thanks...

[Ocean1]

I have worked hard all my life and I,ll bet I,ve worked harder than you in one year than you have in your whole life,I,m talking physical work not behind a pen..and worked just as hard as my Grandad
Thanks...

Good onya. But you know this... how?

[gwigs]

Good onya. But you know this... how?

Same place you get your info from..guessing..

[Ocean1]

Same place you get your info from..guessing..

Oh I know full well that I don't work as hard as my grandparents did.

I know what it took for them to achieve the standard of living they did at the time, and I know damned well that I don't have to work that hard now to live twice as well.

So no, no guesses required.

[gwigs]

Oh I know full well that I don't work as hard as my grandparents did.

I know what it took for them to achieve the standard of living they did at the time, and I know damned well that I don't have to work that hard now to live twice as well.

So no, no guesses required.
Humble apologies , I get what you are saying....

[mashman]

So, to paraphrase: Waa, waah, I don't want to work hard enough to earn the good life. I want to change the rules so that everyone can have what they want without having to work for it. Waah waa.

That about cover it?

More, oh FFS, it doesn't have to be this hard in the slightest and I don't mind earning my way in a society that makes certain things easier and less of a chore. I want to change the rules so that everyone can have a decent standard of living without having to face death due to a lack of money or have to take a what is classed as a shitty job by a bunch of elitist entitlement ridden dipshits and end up having to struggle through life because said dipshits don't know any better. FFS, we're all just human beings. More along those lines. You must take some form of perverse pleasure out of knowing that large numbers of people, quite possibly half of the planets population, have a real fight for survival on their hands. Pity really, coz you would probably be quite useful on "our" side of the fence.

[mashman]

Yup, where is the incentive? Who is going to make sure everyone pulls their weight?

It will be a fuck up.

Some day you kids are going to have to put on some big boy pants. I honestly wish it was sooner rather than later, but meh, I'll not be holding my breath.

In answer to your question: The incentive is to get rid of the financial system and to start taking responsibility for our choices. As said, that's going to require big boys pants. People don't pull their weight in the current system (that includes those who purposefully limit their tax obligations), and that has a detrimental affect on other peoples lives... be it being battered by someone who wants a phone or your money, be it digging in the sand to find fresh water risking illness, be it not having enough funding for what is a needed cause etc... Big boy pants is where it's at, I suggest a few of you try putting some on instead of hiding behind piss poor pathetic excuses and archaic thinking that fucks with the lives of others. Who gives a shit if 0.0001% of the population are lazy cunts? Give them food and a roof and by all means apply some form of "austerity" on them, but they are not a reason to not get the fuck on with doing thing properly. Pathetic.

Where there's a will, there's a way. There is no spoon. Do, or do not, there is no try etfuckinc... We can do anything, but the choice, as always will be yours. Big boy pants v's too hard basket.

[YellowDog]

I live in a mini barter system. Services for fish, eggs, meat, fruit etc. The guy at the Caltex service station just won't play ball though :no:

[Ocean1]

More, oh FFS, it doesn't have to be this hard in the slightest and I don't mind earning my way in a society that makes certain things easier and less of a chore. I want to change the rules so that everyone can have a decent standard of living without having to face death due to a lack of money or have to take a what is classed as a shitty job by a bunch of elitist entitlement ridden dipshits and end up having to struggle through life because said dipshits don't know any better. FFS, we're all just human beings. More along those lines. You must take some form of perverse pleasure out of knowing that large numbers of people, quite possibly half of the planets population, have a real fight for survival on their hands. Pity really, coz you would probably be quite useful on "our" side of the fence.

Correction: Every person on this planet faces death if they fail to produce something useful.

And those of us that have done that, and more, know exactly how much of a chore that is, and see no reason that others should have to work less to achieve the same.

And us "elitists" are indeed entitled to the standard of living our income allows. It's our income. We earned it by producing something others wanted to buy.

So you're ill-considered plan to divest us of the results of our ability to make ourselves useful and to select our particular "chore" with some foresight is patently unfair.

You presumably have no problem with deciding what you should pay for what you buy, so I can't imagine why you've got a problem with everyone else doing the same thing. And that's what establishes not just the value of the product but the income of the guy that made it. So rather than changing the rules, learn to equate productive effort with it's market-driven income and then work as hard as you need to in order to gain the lifestyle you want.

And don't come bleating to those that have done so that it's all too difficult and you can't be fukt making the effort.


Some day you kids are going to have to put on some big boy pants. I honestly wish it was sooner rather than later, but meh, I'll not be holding my breath.

In answer to your question: The incentive is to get rid of the financial system and to start taking responsibility for our choices. As said, that's going to require big boys pants. People don't pull their weight in the current system (that includes those who purposefully limit their tax obligations), and that has a detrimental affect on other peoples lives... be it being battered by someone who wants a phone or your money, be it digging in the sand to find fresh water risking illness, be it not having enough funding for what is a needed cause etc... Big boy pants is where it's at, I suggest a few of you try putting some on instead of hiding behind piss poor pathetic excuses and archaic thinking that fucks with the lives of others. Who gives a shit if 0.0001% of the population are lazy cunts? Give them food and a roof and by all means apply some form of "austerity" on them, but they are not a reason to not get the fuck on with doing thing properly. Pathetic.

Where there's a will, there's a way. There is no spoon. Do, or do not, there is no try etfuckinc... We can do anything, but the choice, as always will be yours. Big boy pants v's too hard basket.

Who gives a fuck if 0.0001% of potential tax isn't actually collected? I understand that you don't like tax evaders, but their lack of contribution to the consolidated fund doesn't affect anyone who doesn't rely on hand-outs. It doesn't affect those who do rely of hand-outs to any measurable degree either.

Neither are they responsible for the actions of those who steal phones or other people's money. That'd be the people who stole phone's and other people's money. Starting to see how this personal responsibility shit works now?

So, grow up a bit so you'll fit those big boy pants currently bunched up around your knees, get off your arse and earn your own life like an adult.

[scumdog]

I have worked hard all my life and I,ll bet I,ve worked harder than you in one year than you have in your whole life,I,m talking physical work not behind a pen..and worked just as hard as my Grandad
Thanks...

Glad you don't think that applies to me....I think...

[mashman]

Correction: Every person on this planet faces death if they fail to produce something useful.

And those of us that have done that, and more, know exactly how much of a chore that is, and see no reason that others should have to work less to achieve the same.

And us "elitists" are indeed entitled to the standard of living our income allows. It's our income. We earned it by producing something others wanted to buy.

So you're ill-considered plan to divest us of the results of our ability to make ourselves useful and to select our particular "chore" with some foresight is patently unfair.

You presumably have no problem with deciding what you should pay for what you buy, so I can't imagine why you've got a problem with everyone else doing the same thing. And that's what establishes not just the value of the product but the income of the guy that made it. So rather than changing the rules, learn to equate productive effort with it's market-driven income and then work as hard as you need to in order to gain the lifestyle you want.

And don't come bleating to those that have done so that it's all too difficult and you can't be fukt making the effort.

That's a correction? It ignores so many facets of every day life that it's an exceptionally laughable position to take. However I do understand what you mean, even though I think it's a shortsighted position to take.

You didn't get to where you are today entirely on your own merit... and without a doubt there are people who have worked by far harder than you but earn far less than you because people like you do not value what they produce. So work ethic does not directly equate to achievement, because that achievement is valued financially. To that end you treat their effort as a chore. The only difference between your 14 hours a day and their 14 hours a day is the value of their output. There is no difference otherwise and to write those people off is disingenius at best as it assumes that hard work = rewards similar to yourself.

You only earn more than someone else. As stated above, people put in as just as much effort as yourself, yet do not receive the same rewards. Can you explain to me how that is fair in human terms, not in market value terms?

What do you perceive you are going to lose given my better thought out plan than the current one we work to? Unfair? Seriously? You haven't got a clue of what unfair is.

I get the market and how you see it and it does absolutely nothing for makind as a whole. Moreover it throws people into poverty, limits education options, limits the positions available that command a liveable wage etc... but you ignore that as a valid side affect of your economy. Again, hard work does not equate to the lifestyle you want because of the way your precious market economy is structured. No man is an island, yet you seem to think that that is exactly what you are. You believe that everything you have achieved is all down to you. You're wrong, hugely so.

Sigh. As I have repeatedly stated, this has fook all to do with my situation. I'm alright jack, but see that too many aren't, and not through lack of effort or work ethic.



Who gives a fuck if 0.0001% of potential tax isn't actually collected? I understand that you don't like tax evaders, but their lack of contribution to the consolidated fund doesn't affect anyone who doesn't rely on hand-outs. It doesn't affect those who do rely of hand-outs to any measurable degree either.

Neither are they responsible for the actions of those who steal phones or other people's money. That'd be the people who stole phone's and other people's money. Starting to see how this personal responsibility shit works now?

So, grow up a bit so you'll fit those big boy pants currently bunched up around your knees, get off your arse and earn your own life like an adult.

You've got to be shining me on. You call me an economic illiterate and come out with that little beauty. It doesn't affect anyone who doesn't rely on a handout? That goes way beyond short sighted. You've rationalised a concept to a finite point and I suggest you take another look at your logic. Who pays for the infrastructure you rely on? and where does that money come from? Seriously dude, you may want to revist your vision of the economy, because it's about as far from reality as I've seen yet as it ignores absolutely everything that NZ society pays for and that the private sector take full advantage of. You obviously have no idea why I dislike tax evaders, because you only see things to a finite point.

You get the society that you are willing to pay for. Yes, we are just as responsible as the thief, because we create a society that makes that situation tenable. As I said before, remove the financial system and those behaviours will all but vanish. Your financial system relies on that behaviour.

Again, I'm alright jack and you're about as far from the mark as you could possibly be... that and you are obviously missing the point entirely. I have been where you are in regards to definding the financial system and it's supposed workings and it's wrong, seriously fuckin wrong given what it is supposed to be achieving. In comparison to the big boy pants you and I are wearing, yours are more akin to a boob tube that's obviously so tight around your neck that it's cutting vital oxygen off from your brain and reducing your capacity for rational thought. But that's alright, at least I understand why you are so set in your ways and are unable to change your own mind. Kind of sad really, my condolences.

[Ocean1]

You only earn more than someone else. As stated above, people put in as just as much effort as yourself, yet do not receive the same rewards. Can you explain to me how that is fair in human terms, not in market value terms?

No problem. I make products and provide services valuable to others in society. Others produce stuff or services worth more to others in society. Yet others produce stuff or services worth less to others in society. That's perfectly fair, everyone has the choice to pay whatever they think is reasonable for anything they want, and everyone has the choice whether they want to provide that item for the market price. If you decide you want to provide goods or a service that others want to pay lots for then you might want to do something about acquiring the wherewithal to enable you to do that.

As I said before, if you want to spend your working day producing stuff nobody wants then don't expect people to pay very much for you to do that. And if you think being "human" means you have the right to expect that someone actually does pay you more for your work than it's worth then you're approximately as wrong about that as every other loser that want's something for nothing.


It doesn't affect anyone who doesn't rely on a handout? That goes way beyond short sighted. You've rationalised a concept to a finite point and I suggest you take another look at your logic. Who pays for the infrastructure you rely on? and where does that money come from? Seriously dude, you may want to revist your vision of the economy, because it's about as far from reality as I've seen yet as it ignores absolutely everything that NZ society pays for and that the private sector take full advantage of. You obviously have no idea why I dislike tax evaders, because you only see things to a finite point.

It affects public funding no more than does your supposed fraudulently claimed 0.0001% of the welfare budget.

As for who pays for infrastructure, I do, along with every other tax payer, including the private sector. The fact that a small percentage of high earners manage to pay less than the government claims they should and the fact that a small percentage of losers defraud the taxpayer is of little consequence. The facts are inescapable. As is the logic.

That's the actual, real reality, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with my perception of it, a perception, I add nowhere near as divergent from that of the vast majority of tax payers as is yours.

Welcome to the real world.

[mashman]

No problem. I make products and provide services valuable to others in society. Others produce stuff or services worth more to others in society. Yet others produce stuff or services worth less to others in society. That's perfectly fair, everyone has the choice to pay whatever they think is reasonable for anything they want, and everyone has the choice whether they want to provide that item for the market price. If you decide you want to provide goods or a service that others want to pay lots for then you might want to do something about acquiring the wherewithal to enable you to do that.

As I said before, if you want to spend your working day producing stuff nobody wants then don't expect people to pay very much for you to do that. And if you think being "human" means you have the right to expect that someone actually does pay you more for your work than it's worth then you're approximately as wrong about that as every other loser that want's something for nothing.

Perfectly fair? But you said that those who earned less must work less hard. It's not fair at all if that's going to be your measure because you're not giving everyone the ability to have the same purchasing power. Like I said, disingenious at best... especially when the goods/services are produced to maximise profit which isn't returned to the employees as a fair wage for hard work.

Being human means just that. You are born into a world to live a life, why should you have to live your life as a lesser human because the elistist entitlement brigade decide that what you produce is not of any great value. You don't understand what it means to be human, otherwise we wouldn't be having this discussion and carrying on with your calling people who earn less than loser highlights just how inhuman you are. You're an automaton at best.



It affects public funding no more than does your supposed fraudulently claimed 0.0001% of the welfare budget.

As for who pays for infrastructure, I do, along with every other tax payer, including the private sector. The fact that a small percentage of high earners manage to pay less than the government claims they should and the fact that a small percentage of losers defraud the taxpayer is of little consequence. The facts are inescapable. As is the logic.

That's the actual, real reality, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with my perception of it, a perception, I add nowhere near as divergent from that of the vast majority of tax payers as is yours.

Welcome to the real world.

bwaaaaaaaaaa ha ha ha ha ha ha haaaaaa... 100,000 people have supposedly squirreled away $32 trillion in offshore accounts and you reckpn that's akin to several billion people who claim the dole? given that $32 trillion is double that of the entire debt of the US I think you're seriously deluding yourself into believing that the drag is coming from the people at the bottom of the pile. Sure they don't help, but they're a drop in the bucket compared to the fraudulent few.

What facts? what logic? You've got none. Again, what's with the loser comment? Actually, can you give me a definition of what you consider to be a loser? I gotta hear this.

Your perception denies the fallout that that reality produces. Hence why you disagree with my viewpoint. You haven't got a clue what the vast majority think and neither do I, but given the result in the poll, it looks as though it'll be much closer than you think... that and the demographic in here are those with money (dat's why bikers are targeted). I betcha once I get into the lower decile areas the numbers are going to swell and that "my" view will become the majority view. People haven't been offered a choice yet and you're claiming that you know what the majority would choose? As per, you're wide of the mark with your justification.

Welcome to World 2.0

[Ocean1]

Perfectly fair? But you said that those who earned less must work less hard.

Nope. I said those who earn less earn less. That is to say they produced goods or services others were willing to pay less for. How hard you chose to work is just a small part of that.


It's not fair at all if that's going to be your measure because you're not giving everyone the ability to have the same purchasing power. Like I said, disingenious at best... especially when the goods/services are produced to maximise profit which isn't returned to the employees as a fair wage for hard work.


Of course it's fair. If they wanted to earn more then they should produce goods or services of more value.

As for employees, you're exposing your native prejudices again. How the fuck would you know whether any given employee had earned his pay or not? As a rule employees earn a metric shitload more than business, is that fair?

Nah, don't bother, your ideas about what's fair are so far from reality your opinion isn't worth shit.

I'll stick to the current deal, where they guy that earned the cash in his pocket gets to decide what to use it for, and those who want more get to earn it.

The rest of your post is so far from relevant to NZ it's not even worth the time it took to read it.

[Oscar]

bwaaaaaaaaaa ha ha ha ha ha ha haaaaaa... 100,000 people have supposedly squirreled away $32 trillion in offshore accounts and you reckpn that's akin to several billion people who claim the dole? given that $32 trillion is double that of the entire debt of the US I think you're seriously deluding yourself into believing that the drag is coming from the people at the bottom of the pile. Sure they don't help, but they're a drop in the bucket compared to the fraudulent few.



How many of those 100,000 people live in NZ?
What relevance do they have to the average Kiwi dole bludger?

[mashman]

Nope. I said those who earn less earn less. That is to say they produced goods or services others were willing to pay less for. How hard you chose to work is just a small part of that.

So it has nothing to do with hard work then and all to do with what value the market puts on your effort (which is something we cleared up eons ago). In other words the market can't produce enough well paid jobs because people just simply wouldn't buy the goods and services at just any price... and then you decide that those who are losers or lazy are at fault based on the value that they they produce, where in reality it's the market and its valuation of their effort that is the issue. Hardly a fair assessment.



Of course it's fair. If they wanted to earn more then they should produce goods or services of more value.

As for employees, you're exposing your native prejudices again. How the fuck would you know whether any given employee had earned his pay or not? As a rule employees earn a metric shitload more than business, is that fair?

Nah, don't bother, your ideas about what's fair are so far from reality your opinion isn't worth shit.

I'll stick to the current deal, where they guy that earned the cash in his pocket gets to decide what to use it for, and those who want more get to earn it.

The rest of your post is so far from relevant to NZ it's not even worth the time it took to read it.

But the market decides what their effort is valued at, not them. Again, not exactly something I would call fair.

They turn up and they do as they're told within the bounds of their contract. Otherwise they get removed. Where's the prejudice?
How can the employees earn more than the business? It's the business that "earns" the money and then it pays its bills to the "contractors" who made that revenue generation possible. Fair would be a floating rate wage and a business operating as a cooperative. Anything other than that is unfair.

bwaaaaaaa ha ha ha ha ha ha haaaaaa... all I'm doing is suggesting that we remove the financial system and its limitations and leaving everything else to run as it does. The reality stays, but the rules can change to suit the individual. I would have thought that would have appealed to you for some reason, after all, every worker would then be able to look after themselves.

But those who want more don't get to earn it because the market only makes a certain number of positions available that command that "more" and iffen you take another person's job, then that person falls back to where the previous person was. Sounds like a lolly scramble to me, hardly what I would call a sound basis on which to run an economy.

baaaaaaaa ha ha ha ha ha ha haaaaaa... Oh god, you've got Oscaritis. Talk of the devil...

[mashman]

How many of those 100,000 people live in NZ?
What relevance do they have to the average Kiwi dole bludger?

:Oi: Dickhead. What does the G stand for in GFC? I suggest you start there.

[scumdog]

But the market decides what their effort is valued at, not them. Again, not exactly something I would call fair..

So...if I make little dolls from used bottle tops and decide they are worth $200 each I should expect to get that $200 - and be crushed when 'the market' decides they are worth $2???

(Thought I'd throw that in there to break the Mashman-Ocean1-Mashman rythm - oh, and occasional gwigs)

[Oscar]

But the market decides what their effort is valued at, not them. Again, not exactly something I would call fair.



So who decides what their effort is worth?
A Central Committee?

[Oscar]

:Oi: Dickhead. What does the G stand for in GFC? I suggest you start there.

So the fact that a Russian Oligarch stashed his money in Bermuda has a direct effect on the decision of a Mangere yoof not to bother with a job?
Also what has the GFC (which occurred five years ago BTW) got to do with dole bludgers?

Oh, yeah in Mushman's world, it's true coz you say it's true...

Who's the dickhead again?

[Oscar]

So...if I make little dolls from used bottle tops and decide they are worth $200 each I should expect to get that $200 - and be crushed when 'the market' decides they are worth $2???

(Thought I'd throw that in there to break the Mashman-Ocean1-Mashman rythm - oh, and occasional gwigs)

It is interesting that the idjut owns an Aprilia.
Who decided what that was worth?
Not worth the new price IMHO, bu the market soon corrects that with second hand ones...they drop like stones.
I guess ownership of second rate Italian motorcycles is not a good look for a financial and economic guru:lol:

[scumdog]

It is interesting that the idjut owns an Aprilia.
Who decided what that was worth?
Not worth the new price IMHO, bu the market soon corrects that with second hand ones...they drop like stones.
I guess ownership of second rate Italian motorcycles is not a good look for a financial and economic guru:lol:


It can't do fuckall km with him riding it - unless his key-board is mounted on the tank:lol:

[Oscar]

It can't do fuckall km with him riding it - unless his key-board is mounted on the tank:lol:

The computer is in the rec room - he uses it after he gets his meds...

[mashman]

So...if I make little dolls from used bottle tops and decide they are worth $200 each I should expect to get that $200 - and be crushed when 'the market' decides they are worth $2???

(Thought I'd throw that in there to break the Mashman-Ocean1-Mashman rythm - oh, and occasional gwigs)

:rofl:... call it art and you'll get your $200 :niceone:


So who decides what their effort is worth?
A Central Committee?

All effort is worth the same. As mentioned earlier, no man is an island and we require the services of those who are currently valued as $1 as much we do the services of those who are valued at $1 million.
There is no value.


So the fact that a Russian Oligarch stashed his money in Bermuda has a direct effect on the decision of a Mangere yoof not to bother with a job?
Also what has the GFC (which occurred five years ago BTW) got to do with dole bludgers?

Oh, yeah in Mushman's world, it's true coz you say it's true...

Who's the dickhead again?

He may well do.
5 years ago? still not happening? The bludgers are probably sweet as, albeit they're getting kicked a little harder in the name of austerity and a sorting out of the country's finances. That and now we have a few thousand more on the dole.

What's true?

You. I thought I made that clear?


It is interesting that the idjut owns an Aprilia.
Who decided what that was worth?
Not worth the new price IMHO, bu the market soon corrects that with second hand ones...they drop like stones.
I guess ownership of second rate Italian motorcycles is not a good look for a financial and economic guru:lol:

Why is that interesting? But you are correct, I do "own" it, paid for in cash.
The guys who are selling it.
I didn't buy it as an investment.
heh... image isn't everything.


It can't do fuckall km with him riding it - unless his key-board is mounted on the tank:lol:

It does the work run and unfortunately that's about it. Family commitments take the rest of my time, that and I ain't overly convinced that the charging system is working properly... which reminds me, I need to get in touch with the importer to see if I can get the same deal as the Europeans in regards to the new rotor they've provided to solve the burning stator issue. Mind you, I get to finish works at 3 these days and as I'm paying the sitter a decent hourly rate, the odd long way home is doable with minimal traffic getting in my way.

[mashman]

The computer is in the rec room - he uses it after he gets his meds...

I wish the meds I prefer to take were legal. But too many ignorant fuckwits need to keep the prison population up whilst wasting tax payer funding.

[Ocean1]

So it has nothing to do with hard work then and all to do with what value the market puts on your effort (which is something we cleared up eons ago). In other words the market can't produce enough well paid jobs because people just simply wouldn't buy the goods and services at just any price... and then you decide that those who are losers or lazy are at fault based on the value that they they produce, where in reality it's the market and its valuation of their effort that is the issue. Hardly a fair assessment.

I never suggested anyone was lazy. And if you think you can produce anything of value without hard work… nevermind, perfectly consistent with the rest of your ideas.

It is absolutely the right of those who earned their money to decide whether it’s worth spending on any given product. And yes that affects how much the product’s supplier, (including it’s employees) gets paid.

And yes that’s perfectly fair.

If you don’t like it then a change in career is probably a good idea.

Your choice.


How can the employees earn more than the business? It's the business that "earns" the money and then it pays its bills to the "contractors" who made that revenue generation possible. Fair would be a floating rate wage and a business operating as a cooperative. Anything other than that is unfair.

Apparently quite easily. Nationally total personal income is at least an order of magnitude greater than total company profits.

Revenue comes from customers, not contractors.

In fact I operated a very similar arrangement for years, basic wage plus a share of profits. Works OK until you get a bad month or two, then while you’re busy re-mortgaging the house your “floating rate” employees are taking the gains from the good times and fucking off. So in my experience it’s only fair when employees firstly produce more than they cost to employ and secondly if they stump up with some capital to contribute so they’re sharing the risks as well.

[Oscar]

All effort is worth the same. As mentioned earlier, no man is an island and we require the services of those who are currently valued as $1 as much we do the services of those who are valued at $1 million.
There is no value.





So where's the incentive to learn a trade, or become better educated?
Also "we require"?
Is that your role as Commissar?
What do you get paid for your job on the Central Committee, Comrade идиот?

[bogan]

All effort is worth the same. As mentioned earlier, no man is an island and we require the services of those who are currently valued as $1 as much we do the services of those who are valued at $1 million.
There is no value.

No we don't, consider a heart surgeon compared to a hooker.

[Oscar]

No we don't, consider a heart surgeon compared to a hooker.

I'd want both to have a steady hand...

[Ocean1]

:I need to get in touch with the importer to see if I can get the same deal as the Europeans in regards to the new rotor they've provided to solve the burning stator issue.

But, they're the producer. How dare you presume to attempt to dictate terms of trade with a producer!

[Ocean1]

I'd want both to have a steady hand...

... and a clean bill of health.

[Oscar]

But, they're the producer. How dare you presume to attempt to dictate terms of trade with a producer!

He's the Commissar - first amongst equals.
He must be obeyed...

http://www.imfdb.org/images/thumb/4/40/MW_Soviet_TT33_3.jpg/600px-MW_Soviet_TT33_3.jpg

[scumdog]

I'd want both to have a steady hand...


Hmmm...I would prefer she had a shakey hand - and a strong grip...:msn-wink:

[mashman]

It is absolutely the right of those who earned their money to decide whether it’s worth spending on any given product. And yes that affects how much the product’s supplier, (including it’s employees) gets paid.

And yes that’s perfectly fair.

If you don’t like it then a change in career is probably a good idea.

Your choice.

So it's ok not to be fair as a "producer" because you only have to be as fair as you decide you choose to be?

Sigh. You still think this is about me dontcha? Let it go bro, it ain't.



Apparently quite easily. Nationally total personal income is at least an order of magnitude greater than total company profits.

Revenue comes from customers, not contractors.

In fact I operated a very similar arrangement for years, basic wage plus a share of profits. Works OK until you get a bad month or two, then while you’re busy re-mortgaging the house your “floating rate” employees are taking the gains from the good times and fucking off. So in my experience it’s only fair when employees firstly produce more than they cost to employ and secondly if they stump up with some capital to contribute so they’re sharing the risks as well.

The business has the money before the employee. They make their profit and then pay their bills (employees) from that profit.

I didn't say revenue came from the contractors.

Did you pay yourself exactly the same wage as your staff?


So where's the incentive to learn a trade, or become better educated?
Also "we require"?
Is that your role as Commissar?
What do you get paid for your job on the Central Committee, Comrade идиот?

No need to trade and there are plenty of posts regarding incentive... yow just need to go back a page or two.
Yes, we, all of us.
I don't have a role.
Have you not been paying attentions, I would get paid nothing ばか


No we don't, consider a heart surgeon compared to a hooker.

We don't need either... the potential downside for some is that hookers may well stop hooking under "my" system.


I'd want both to have a steady hand...

heh... you beat me to it.

[mashman]

But, they're the producer. How dare you presume to attempt to dictate terms of trade with a producer!

:rofl: Dictating? I realise that customer service means fuck all to some company's and taking personal responsibility for a common design fault is too much to expect... but if you don't ask, you'll never know.

[oldrider]

He's the Commissar - first amongst equals.
He must be obeyed...

Even with their "big gun" incentive schemes, "all" of the communist states have diminished, collapsed, disintegrated or kept their name while they practice Capitalism!

Pity as much energy and effort hadn't gone into correcting the "few" vital faults of the world monitory system as has gone into the worlds failed communist experiments!

Correct the flaws of world finance and capitalism would blossom the way it should have and most of the worlds social problems would benefit from it accordingly!

Nothing succeeds like success and the most charitable heart is a successful heart!

World monitory problems are "NOT" an accident! :no:

[bogan]

We don't need either... the potential downside for some is that hookers may well stop hooking under "my" system.

We don't need heart surgeons? What sort of fucking backwater civilization are you aiming for here?

[mashman]

We don't need heart surgeons? What sort of fucking backwater civilization are you aiming for here?

We'll grow a heart in a jar then a robotic surgeon will replace the heart :D... the future backwater civilisation

[Ocean1]

So it's ok not to be fair as a "producer" because you only have to be as fair as you decide you choose to be?



What?

I said it's fair that the buyer decides how much he wants to pay.

If he can't buy what he wants for that price then the product's obviously worth more than he wants to pay.

Either way it don't work the other way around. It's called provider driven market, and while they crop up from time to time they always cause mayhem before their market collapses.




The business has the money before the employee.

Is that a fact?

I must change my T&C's, my bastard clients NEVER pay me before I have to pay my wages.


They make their profit and then pay their bills (employees) from that profit.


Wrong again, there's no profit until all the costs have been paid for, including wages, even if the wages are more than it's associated revenue.

For someone with such firm ideas about how business works you don't really have many clues about how they work, do you?


Did you pay yourself exactly the same wage as your staff?



Those as experienced as me, yes. In spite of the fact that I personally generated a fair bit more income than the next most profitable employee.

As I said, it didn't work out in the long run.

In fact one ex employee came to see me years later, having set up his own business. I helped him sort out some issues and he's now one of my principal suppliers.

[mashman]

What?

I said it's fair that the buyer decides how much he wants to pay.

If he can't buy what he wants for that price then the product's obviously worth more than he wants to pay.

Either way it don't work the other way around. It's called provider driven market, and while they crop up from time to time they always cause mayhem before their market collapses.

I understood what you meant. The price is the price, producer has set it, consumer must pay for it... but the producer only has to be as fair as they decide to be. There's no 80 - 20 rule for arguments sake.



Is that a fact?

I must change my T&C's, my bastard clients NEVER pay me before I have to pay my wages.

So you're saying that even if a business isn't paid, the employees get paid irrespective? that's not my experience as I've had friends selling the office furniture, illegally I might add, to pay themselve, or at least get some of their good faith repaid.



Wrong again, there's no profit until all the costs have been paid for, including wages, even if the wages are more than it's associated revenue.

For someone with such firm ideas about how business works you don't really have many clues about how they work, do you?

Oh really. So why is it when a producer goes out of business the creditors/customers are guaranteed to get their money back as well as the staff/contractors they have hired? Again, I'm very familiar with that not always being the case.



Those as experienced as me, yes. In spite of the fact that I personally generated a fair bit more income than the next most profitable employee.

As I said, it didn't work out in the long run.

In fact one ex employee came to see me years later, having set up his own business. I helped him sort out some issues and he's now one of my principal suppliers.

Experienced? I thought you paid based on what their production value was.

Truly sorry to hear that.

You must almost be a decent employer.

[Ocean1]

I understood what you meant. The price is the price, producer has set it, consumer must pay for it... but the producer only has to be as fair as they decide to be. There's no 80 - 20 rule for arguments sake.

No, the consumer has the ultimate control: they can decline to pay for the product.

If too many consumers agree the product's not worth the asking price then the producer must reduce the price.


So you're saying that even if a business isn't paid, the employees get paid irrespective?

The employer's required to pay his employees whether his customers have paid him or not. In fact as I suggested he almost always has to pay them before his customer has paid for their product/services.

If the company goes into receivership as a result of clients not paying then employees are legally much better protected than any other creditor.


Oh really. So why is it when a producer goes out of business the creditors/customers are guaranteed to get their money back as well as the staff/contractors they have hired? Again, I'm very familiar with that not always being the case.

Not sure what you mean. Firstly, profit is what's left of the revenue after all of the costs have been accounted for. If a company goes out of business they're not suddenly exempt from having to pay those costs. If the company is put into receivership then the creditors aren't automatically guaranteed their money. As for their customers... why on earth would their customers be due any money? it usually flows the other way. If the company doesn't have the resources to clear outstanding debts the receivers can tap the company directors for it.

The point I was originally making was that a company's costs are generally due before the income those costs generated is due. It's called fiscal drag, and as I said it means the employees generally get paid before the company does.


Experienced? I thought you paid based on what their production value was.

Weekly pay based on market rates for qual's and experience, profit share based on bookable hrs.


Truly sorry to hear that.

You must almost be a decent employer.

Most employees presumably think their employers are. Why would you work for an arsehole?

Again, your prejudices are showing.

[mashman]

No, the consumer has the ultimate control: they can decline to pay for the product.

If too many consumers agree the product's not worth the asking price then the producer must reduce the price.

I guess that all depends on the product service and the numbers using that product and service.

True... but highly unlikely to happen, much to my disappointment at times, heh.



The employer's required to pay his employees whether his customers have paid him or not. In fact as I suggested he almost always has to pay them before his customer has paid for their product/services.

If the company goes into receivership as a result of clients not paying then employees are legally much better protected than any other creditor.

True to a degree. I guess that all depends on how the company is wound up and that people haven't pre-ordered.

I guess that depends on how much money is left, but that's the gamble I guess.



Not sure what you mean. Firstly, profit is what's left of the revenue after all of the costs have been accounted for. If a company goes out of business they're not suddenly exempt from having to pay those costs. If the company is put into receivership then the creditors aren't automatically guaranteed their money. As for their customers... why on earth would their customers be due any money? it usually flows the other way. If the company doesn't have the resources to clear outstanding debts the receivers can tap the company directors for it.

The point I was originally making was that a company's costs are generally due before the income those costs generated is due. It's called fiscal drag, and as I said it means the employees generally get paid before the company does.

Again I guess that's back to the product, I was especially thinking about financial investments, banks (Cyprus) and the likes. Hotchin and co can rip the company off, sorry, I mean pay themselves a good salary, and live very well after the company goes tits and leaves customers short. Again, tis a gamble but if these guys are found guilty, they should lose everything... in the name of fairness like. I was talking about prepayment in regards to customers getting their money back, people getting stiffed over houses primarily and losing their life savings.



Weekly pay based on market rates for qual's and experience, profit share based on bookable hrs.

Ahhhhhhh, a workers nirvana, unless of course they ain't in it for all... which I guess is where they leave when they have to tighten their belts. Shame as I love the business model, so much so I've "designed" an economy around it ;).



Most employees presumably think their employers are. Why would you work for an arsehole?

Again, your prejudices are showing.

heh... I've met very few good employers. In fact none in the UK and 2 here. Poor in 16 years in IT. No doubt my forthright nature has something to do with it, yet I'm not a cunt. Bottom line, people need to get paid eh.

From experience. And they are changing to an extent.

[bogan]

We'll grow a heart in a jar then a robotic surgeon will replace the heart :D... the future backwater civilisation

Ahh, so Robotics Engineers will be more valued/required than hookers then?

[mashman]

Ahh, so Robotics Engineers will be more valued/required than hookers then?

That'll depend on the state of your health really. If you don't need either, then they're as valuable as each other and you can only hope that you get to see the latter more than the former. In other words, when you're horny and no one will love you other than a hooker, the hooker is more valuable/important and when you have to have a heart replacement, the robotic engineer will be more important/valuable.

[mashman]

Even with their "big gun" incentive schemes, "all" of the communist states have diminished, collapsed, disintegrated or kept their name while they practice Capitalism!

Pity as much energy and effort hadn't gone into correcting the "few" vital faults of the world monitory system as has gone into the worlds failed communist experiments!

Correct the flaws of world finance and capitalism would blossom the way it should have and most of the worlds social problems would benefit from it accordingly!

Nothing succeeds like success and the most charitable heart is a successful heart!

World monitory problems are "NOT" an accident! :no:

I wonder if anyone knows what the end goal of any of these "isms" is supposed to be? Why do we try to organise ourselves in a multitude of ways? There must be some reason for it?

[Ocean1]

Ahhhhhhh, a workers nirvana, unless of course they ain't in it for all... which I guess is where they leave when they have to tighten their belts. Shame as I love the business model, so much so I've "designed" an economy around it ;)

Yeah. And like I've been telling you your worker's nirvana doesn't work.

And as I've also told you a million times you can't have an economy without a currency.

[bogan]

That'll depend on the state of your health really. If you don't need either, then they're as valuable as each other and you can only hope that you get to see the latter more than the former. In other words, when you're horny and no one will love you other than a hooker, the hooker is more valuable/important and when you have to have a heart replacement, the robotic engineer will be more important/valuable.

So, what happened to this social responsibility and empathy you were talking about? Now it's all about what the me-me-me needs?

Oh, and you'd better bloody value the Engie before you need that replacement, advanced robotics takes time to develop.

[Woodman]

Why would a woman become a hooker on Mashmans planet but for the sex ? Certainly not money. Actually, why would someone put themselves through years of study and long hours to become a heart surgeon when everyone gets the same whether they choose to go to work or not. Extra credit? no, that would be a form of currency.

Personally, I would just spend my days doing sweet fa and riding round on a dirt bike. Obviously not a road bike because the roads would never get maintained.

Idealistic twaddle that ignores human nature.

[blue rider]

Even with their "big gun" incentive schemes, "all" of the communist states have diminished, collapsed, disintegrated or kept their name while they practice Capitalism!

Pity as much energy and effort hadn't gone into correcting the "few" vital faults of the world monitory system as has gone into the worlds failed communist experiments!

Correct the flaws of world finance and capitalism would blossom the way it should have and most of the worlds social problems would benefit from it accordingly!

Nothing succeeds like success and the most charitable heart is a successful heart!

World monitory problems are "NOT" an accident! :no:



and yet here is the largest communist economy buying up, financing and supporting the capitalistic rest of the world, and many thrid world countries thrown in the mix

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/02/opinion/sunday/chinas-economic-empire.html?_r=0


the question really is not Mashmans Utopia, which is just as a Utopia as is unfettered Capitalism. The question is what society do we want to live in, and how do we finance it, and how much do we want to pay for it.

1. some want to pay nothing....their money their decision....etc. Ok, so Toll Roads, all puplic toilets to be pay for use, schools are pay for use, hospitals are pay for use...etc. you get my drift.

2. some want everything to be free to use....free roads, free health care, free schools for all, free puplic toilets...

3. others want the free stuff for use, after they financed it. I.e Taxes collected to pay for schools, roads, hosipitals and puplic toilets. Maybe a co payment to pay for upkeep and future investment.


in scenario 1. No Taxes....well what is one going to do when one is to sick/old to work? When one can't find work....(because they are lazy, unproductive, drug abusing scoundrels, or just shit out of luck).....well society could just round them up and cull them....after all they are unproductive so why waste resources one them?

in scenario 2. all is free....well this does not work yet, only in Mashmans scenario, cause we all just work for puplic use and consumptions to keep us in a state of comfort without excess. (sadly still utopia...mankind will need to evolve a bit more)

scenario 3. this is what we are having now, and the only question that really needs to be raised and answered is....are all users contributing and accordlingly? i.e. should a transport company pay a user fee for roads?, should parents have co payments for schools, students co pay for their education.


and one last question.....would ocean1 work for ocean1 and would ocean1 consider ocean1 a productive employer that is earning money or is just a worthless looser who needs to be unemployed pronto. also would the worker ocean1 consider the boss ocean1 a major prick the size of a pinhead.

[Ocean1]

and yet here is the largest communist economy buying up, financing and supporting the capitalistic rest of the world, and many thrid world countries thrown in the mix.

Have you dealt with China? Been there?

The piece of China the rest of the world deals with is hard core capitalist. The bit that's communist is the peasantry, and you really don't want to be making an example of how prosperous communism is based on them, take my word for it.


and one last question.....would ocean1 work for ocean1 and would ocean1 consider ocean1 a productive employer that is earning money or is just a worthless looser who needs to be unemployed pronto. also would the worker ocean1 consider the boss ocean1 a major prick the size of a pinhead.

He does. He is. And he's as big a prick as current company requires.

[mashman]

So, what happened to this social responsibility and empathy you were talking about? Now it's all about what the me-me-me needs?

Oh, and you'd better bloody value the Engie before you need that replacement, advanced robotics takes time to develop.

There was no me in there, just plenty of you... those who need to be valued to enable themselves to feel self-esteem and self-worth because the only way they can get those fuzzy feelings is to measure themselves against someone else... preferably a large large group of someone else, coz they don't want to feel mediocre.

And the Engie better value the farmer and the electricity guy and the bin man and the doctor and the water treatment folk and the road workers etc... as they fulfill the needs allowing him to be a geek.

[bogan]

There was no me in there, just plenty of you... those who need to be valued to enable themselves to feel self-esteem and self-worth because the only way they can get those fuzzy feelings is to measure themselves against someone else... preferably a large large group of someone else, coz they don't want to feel mediocre.

And the Engie better value the farmer and the electricity guy and the bin man and the doctor and the water treatment folk and the road workers etc... as they fulfill the needs allowing him to be a geek.

Dodging the question I see. When talking about the collective, a 'you' is really just a 'me' in third person (btw, your you is my me), neither are reflective of the whole. It's not about self esteem and self worth, its about ensuring the jobs that need to be done are done. Does your system need Engies more than hookers? more than artists? more than surgeons? How about ratios, does your system need at least one Engies to every 1000 farmers? to every 20 lingerie salesmen? A mechanic to at least every 50 bus drivers?

[mashman]

Why would a woman become a hooker on Mashmans planet but for the sex ? Certainly not money. Actually, why would someone put themselves through years of study and long hours to become a heart surgeon when everyone gets the same whether they choose to go to work or not. Extra credit? no, that would be a form of currency.

Personally, I would just spend my days doing sweet fa and riding round on a dirt bike. Obviously not a road bike because the roads would never get maintained.

Idealistic twaddle that ignores human nature.

Absolutely, they wouldn't have to unless they wanted to. Imagine not having to be forced into having sex with numerous strangers because someone doesn't have financial power over you anymore. I know, I'm sorry, we should continue with such slavery. My god :shit:, you mean heart surgeons only become heart surgeons because a heart surgeon gets paid lots of money. And here was me thinking that they might actually enjoy that job.

:rofl: yeah, coz that's how it would be :facepalm:

:killingme... human nature is bullshit. You make the decision tat you could live in that sort of society or you wouldn't. Human nature is unquantifiable as it states that we must all have the same range of emotions and feelings and will all perform an act the same given the exact same set of circumstances where that is patently not true.

All I hear is, wahh wahh someone might get more than me and I think I deserve more than them because that's how the market values human beings. Wahh wahh, I know that all of the people out there are unable to deny their human nature, because a book and some experts told me so. Well, you're wrong. I know plenty of people who have changed their minds in regards to living in a financially free society. Human nature denies that that can happen. So yeah, the human nature argument is bullshit that's regurgitated because that's all people know. Fuckin hilarious that they claim to have thoughts of their own given they prescribe to human nature as the overriding factor in decision making etc... It's laughable.

[mashman]

Dodging the question I see. When talking about the collective, a 'you' is really just a 'me' in third person (btw, your you is my me), neither are reflective of the whole. It's not about self esteem and self worth, its about ensuring the jobs that need to be done are done. Does your system need Engies more than hookers? more than artists? more than surgeons? How about ratios, does your system need at least one Engies to every 1000 farmers? to every 20 lingerie salesmen? A mechanic to at least every 50 bus drivers?

:rofl: oh, you were serious. If a you is a me, then a you referring to anyone is every me on the planet. Still well within the bounds of being a "collective". Funny, coz all I hear these days is that a job gives you self-esteem and self-worth. They're gonna be real upset to hear you talking like that. If you don't need either, then they're as valuable as each other and you can only hope that you get to see the latter more than the former. As for the artists etc... are they full-time or part-time and are they African or European? Actually none of that matters, but if the ratio to mechanics v's breakdowns/maintenance is such that mechanics end up working 2 hours per day, then they end up working 2 hours per day, there is no golden rule or ratio.

[mashman]

and yet here is the largest communist economy buying up, financing and supporting the capitalistic rest of the world, and many thrid world countries thrown in the mix

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/02/opinion/sunday/chinas-economic-empire.html?_r=0


the question really is not Mashmans Utopia, which is just as a Utopia as is unfettered Capitalism. The question is what society do we want to live in, and how do we finance it, and how much do we want to pay for it.

1. some want to pay nothing....their money their decision....etc. Ok, so Toll Roads, all puplic toilets to be pay for use, schools are pay for use, hospitals are pay for use...etc. you get my drift.

2. some want everything to be free to use....free roads, free health care, free schools for all, free puplic toilets...

3. others want the free stuff for use, after they financed it. I.e Taxes collected to pay for schools, roads, hosipitals and puplic toilets. Maybe a co payment to pay for upkeep and future investment.


in scenario 1. No Taxes....well what is one going to do when one is to sick/old to work? When one can't find work....(because they are lazy, unproductive, drug abusing scoundrels, or just shit out of luck).....well society could just round them up and cull them....after all they are unproductive so why waste resources one them?

in scenario 2. all is free....well this does not work yet, only in Mashmans scenario, cause we all just work for puplic use and consumptions to keep us in a state of comfort without excess. (sadly still utopia...mankind will need to evolve a bit more)

scenario 3. this is what we are having now, and the only question that really needs to be raised and answered is....are all users contributing and accordlingly? i.e. should a transport company pay a user fee for roads?, should parents have co payments for schools, students co pay for their education.


and one last question.....would ocean1 work for ocean1 and would ocean1 consider ocean1 a productive employer that is earning money or is just a worthless looser who needs to be unemployed pronto. also would the worker ocean1 consider the boss ocean1 a major prick the size of a pinhead.

My "utopia" does not require perfection... and will allow pretty much any form of governance structure to be overlaid in order to respond to the wishes of the majority.

[bogan]

:rofl: oh, you were serious. If a you is a me, then a you referring to anyone is every me on the planet. Still well within the bounds of being a "collective". Funny, coz all I hear these days is that a job gives you self-esteem and self-worth. They're gonna be real upset to hear you talking like that. If you don't need either, then they're as valuable as each other and you can only hope that you get to see the latter more than the former. As for the artists etc... are they full-time or part-time and are they African or European? Actually none of that matters, but if the ratio to mechanics v's breakdowns/maintenance is such that mechanics end up working 2 hours per day, then they end up working 2 hours per day, there is no golden rule or ratio.

It's that you or me refers to a singular part of the collective, not the whole collective. As evidenced by your next bit of question dodging, I don't need either at the moment, but that doesn't mean your society doesn't need either now does it.

Hang on, you're telling me that if I choose a popular profession, I have to work even less? So the poor bastard who decides to take one for the team and do the crutching has to work more than the guy who decides selling lingerie is right for him, and the 3076 other guys he works with.

[Woodman]

:killingme... human nature is bullshit.

Interesting..................

[mashman]

It's that you or me refers to a singular part of the collective, not the whole collective. As evidenced by your next bit of question dodging, I don't need either at the moment, but that doesn't mean your society doesn't need either now does it.

Hang on, you're telling me that if I choose a popular profession, I have to work even less? So the poor bastard who decides to take one for the team and do the crutching has to work more than the guy who decides selling lingerie is right for him, and the 3076 other guys he works with.

It's not my fault the answer you're getting isn't the answer you translate my answer to be. Did I say that "my" society didn't need either? Coz I don't remember having said that at all. There was no dodging, I answered your question.

There is a possibility that your chosen profession could mean that you end up working less, yes. I mentioned this several posts ago when describing what my potential day could be. In theory you could work for 1 hour per day and it may well be enough to allow society to function. I thought we had decided that the crutching was a task for a robot. No one will be selling lingerie. there may well be someone in the shop to help you should you require assistance and their day may well end up being longer than that of the robot. But your scenario is a possibility. The more daggas there are, the quicker the job gets done, the more people helping choose knickers et al, the quicker the job gets done.

[mashman]

Interesting..................

So how do you define human nature?

[Woodman]

So how do you define human nature?


Its pretty complex, and I am no rocket scientist, but that doesn't matter because if it doesn't suit your world then as you say its "bullshit".

Will you try to persuade your potential followers by telling them how they feel is bullshit?

Good luck with that .

Where are the pink fairies when ya need them?

[bogan]

It's not my fault the answer you're getting isn't the answer you translate my answer to be. Did I say that "my" society didn't need either? Coz I don't remember having said that at all. There was no dodging, I answered your question.

There is a possibility that your chosen profession could mean that you end up working less, yes. I mentioned this several posts ago when describing what my potential day could be. In theory you could work for 1 hour per day and it may well be enough to allow society to function. I thought we had decided that the crutching was a task for a robot. No one will be selling lingerie. there may well be someone in the shop to help you should you require assistance and their day may well end up being longer than that of the robot. But your scenario is a possibility. The more daggas there are, the quicker the job gets done, the more people helping choose knickers et al, the quicker the job gets done.

Short memory? And no, you still haven't answered my question as to which jobs are more valuable to the society's ability to function.


We don't need either... the potential downside for some is that hookers may well stop hooking under "my" system.

I think the problem you have, is that somehow you're equating less work hours in a money free system to greater productivity than that found in a money based system, by a very large margin. Which is just illogical. The more of one job you have, and thus less work hours for that job, is also less people left for other jobs your society would need. I don't think I can put it any more simply than that.

[mashman]

Its pretty complex, and I am no rocket scientist, but that doesn't matter because if it doesn't suit your world then as you say its "bullshit".

Will you try to persuade your potential followers by telling them how they feel is bullshit?

Good luck with that .

Where are the pink fairies when ya need them?

So you need to be a rocket scientist to be able to explain human nature, and you're not one, but you are qualified to enough to state that human nature exists.

Interesting.........

Surely you mean my leaders?


Short memory? And no, you still haven't answered my question as to which jobs are more valuable to the society's ability to function.

I think the problem you have, is that somehow you're equating less work hours in a money free system to greater productivity than that found in a money based system, by a very large margin. Which is just illogical. The more of one job you have, and thus less work hours for that job, is also less people left for other jobs your society would need. I don't think I can put it any more simply than that.

Not needing them won't mean that they don't exist... but they are not essential. Every job is as important as any other job.

Which does more work. 1 man doing 8 hours of 10 men doing 1 hour? You're forgetting all of the jobs that are going to become redundant.

[bogan]

Not needing them won't mean that they don't exist... but they are not essential. Every job is as important as any other job.

Which does more work. 1 man doing 8 hours of 10 men doing 1 hour? You're forgetting all of the jobs that are going to become redundant.

What jobs are going to become redundant? 'every job is as important as any other job' certainly doesn't make me think there's much redundancy, certainly not 90% of them.

Also, if the Engineers who designs the robotics which dag the sheep which feed the citizens aren't essential, who is?

[mashman]

What jobs are going to become redundant? 'every job is as important as any other job' certainly doesn't make me think there's much redundancy, certainly not 90% of them.

Also, if the Engineers who designs the robotics which dag the sheep which feed the citizens aren't essential, who is?

Pretty much all bank related jobs, accountants, company finance departments, a good 50+% of IT staff and likely many many more jobs that could be done by less people. So let's go for approx half of the current workforce.

As I said, they're all essential.

[bogan]

As I said, they're all essential.


but they are not essential.

See, now I think you're just having a troll, but making yourself look like an idiot is a really weird way to troll. Unfortunately it does seem to be becoming one of the more common way to do it.

[mashman]

See, now I think you're just having a troll, but making yourself look like an idiot is a really weird way to troll. Unfortunately it does seem to be becoming one of the more common way to do it.

So you're not happy with either answer? Hmmmmm... yeah fair enough, it was a shit troll. All jobs that are required will be essential. Currently we don't know every single job that is required... and up until that point every job is essential as they all currently support each other in one way or another.

[Woodman]

So you need to be a rocket scientist to be able to explain human nature, and you're not one, but you are qualified to enough to state that human nature exists.

Interesting.........

Surely you mean my leaders?

The ability to form an opinion is I think an important part of human nature. Will that be bullshit?

The instinct to improve ones self to rise above the herd (winning) is also a part of human nature. Impossible in your world, unless one day after a hard days work in the salt mine you feel like rewarding yourself with a free Aston Martin, or will there be only one option for vehicles to avoid any reward/ equality/ conflict issues?

[bogan]

So you're not happy with either answer? Hmmmmm... yeah fair enough, it was a shit troll. All jobs that are required will be essential. Currently we don't know every single job that is required... and up until that point every job is essential as they all currently support each other in one way or another.

You're making even less sense now; all jobs are essential, but we are going to cut it by 50%, and work hours by 80%, and allow anyone to choose whatever job they want. There simply has to be some sort of mechanism to ensure the workforce is distributed in such a way to ensure the society function, your complete unwillingness to address or acknowledge this fact just makes it obvious the system you propose is fatally flawed.

[mashman]

The ability to form an opinion is I think an important part of human nature. Will that be bullshit?

The instinct to improve ones self to rise above the herd (winning) is also a part of human nature. Impossible in your world, unless one day after a hard days work in the salt mine you feel like rewarding yourself with a free Aston Martin, or will there be only one option for vehicles to avoid any reward/ equality/ conflict issues?

Fair point. Is the opinion that is formed human nature?

I disagree, because I improve myself to improve myself, not to win or rise above the herd. That does not mean that people won't think that way, but I doubt they'll live every facet of their life that way. Winning, eating breakfast faster today than you did yesterday? You still have to decide to want to eat your breakfast quicker. The decision drives the behaviour. Hence I don't need an Aston Martin at all, even if it was free. I'm sure you guys can cage fight or hand bag at dawn as to who gets the free Aston. If people still wanna make Aston's, then I guess they'll still exist.

[mashman]

You're making even less sense now; all jobs are essential, but we are going to cut it by 50%, and work hours by 80%, and allow anyone to choose whatever job they want. There simply has to be some sort of mechanism to ensure the workforce is distributed in such a way to ensure the society function, your complete unwillingness to address or acknowledge this fact just makes it obvious the system you propose is fatally flawed.

I have addressed it. It comes under the banner of, I will do any job that is required in order to keep us from going back to the financial system. That also covers the amount of hours required. Removing 50% of the workforce does not mean that essential jobs will not get done. Essential being those jobs that are required.

[avgas]

Which does more work. 1 man doing 8 hours of 10 men doing 1 hour? You're forgetting all of the jobs that are going to become redundant.
Although I hate both of these gents (with vengeance), I do like this conversation - because it shows how the 2 extremes don't have a clue.
Friedman vs Mao

At one of our dinners, Milton recalled traveling to an Asian country in the 1960s and visiting a worksite where a new canal was being built. He was shocked to see that, instead of modern tractors and earth movers, the workers had shovels. He asked why there were so few machines. The government bureaucrat explained: “You don’t understand. This is a jobs program.” To which Milton replied: “Oh, I thought you were trying to build a canal. If it’s jobs you want, then you should give these workers spoons, not shovels.”

I thought the whole point was to dig a canal!

[bogan]

I have addressed it. It comes under the banner of, I will do any job that is required in order to keep us from going back to the financial system. That also covers the amount of hours required. Removing 50% of the workforce does not mean that essential jobs will not get done. Essential being those jobs that are required.

:lol: Like your logic, I'm outa here.

[Ocean1]

Removing 50% of the workforce does not mean that essential jobs will not get done.

Been saying that for years.

[mashman]

:lol: Like your logic, I'm outa here.

Have fun dear.


Been saying that for years.

In which case I think I better change my mind.

[mashman]

Although I hate both of these gents (with vengeance), I do like this conversation - because it shows how the 2 extremes don't have a clue.
Friedman vs Mao

I thought the whole point was to dig a canal!

It'll also double as a mass grave.

[mashman]

For those dickheads out there who don't understand how to connect the dots, you won't want to watch this because the guys is obviously a conspiracy theorist and you'll only pop something important, and I'm too young to die laughing.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-KZ_uLKxF4&feature=youtu.be

[scumdog]

For those dickheads out there who don't understand how to connect the dots, you won't want to watch this because the guys is obviously a conspiracy theorist and you'll only pop something important, and I'm too young to die laughing.



'Former' - THAT rings alarm bells straight away...

[Woodman]

For those dickheads out there who don't understand how to connect the dots, you won't want to watch this because the guys is obviously a conspiracy theorist and you'll only pop something important, and I'm too young to die laughing.


Maybe you are the dickhead conspiracy theorist. You only believe this because you want to and it supports your cause.

[mashman]

'Former' - THAT rings alarm bells straight away...

Coz he was sacked? or coz he left and Robert DeNiro says you can never leave?


Maybe you are the dickhead conspiracy theorist. You only believe this because you want to and it supports your cause.

That could be it... although he didn't say anything that supported "my" cause. Granted that still leaves me as a dickhead conspiracy theorist, but I can live with that.

[mashman]

I chortled... just a bit.

https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/946787_492118037526286_1975441643_n.jpg

[mashman]

How far from the truth is this likely to be? (http://www.gocomics.com/nonsequitur/2013/06/08)

[Ocean1]

How far from the truth is this likely to be? (http://www.gocomics.com/nonsequitur/2013/06/08)

Just a little further than your usual bleat.

And saved from undeniable complete and utter crap by the contribution of this gentleman:
Modern definition of austerity: not spending other peoples money.

[Oscar]

How far from the truth is this likely to be? (http://www.gocomics.com/nonsequitur/2013/06/08)

Like any zealot, you are a. quite stupid, and b. bereft of humour (apart from that you provide unconsciously as a result of a.).

[mashman]

Just a little further than your usual bleat.

And saved from undeniable complete and utter crap by the contribution of this gentleman:

It's all other people's money.


Like any zealot, you are a. quite stupid, and b. bereft of humour (apart from that you provide unconsciously as a result of a.).

:killingme... I see you brought your usual high standard of dickheadedness to the table :yawn:

[avgas]

How far from the truth is this likely to be? (http://www.gocomics.com/nonsequitur/2013/06/08)
Market forces at the end of the day are the people.
No people, no stuff - no stuff, no money.
Markets collapse when money people think the general public care about something (e.g. repaying a morgage, buying new stuff). Soon as the public tune changes to "not caring" or "can't be bothered" there is no market - and it collapses.

Which is why the think tankers usually are invested in keeping people in the system, rather than exploiting it. The exploitations can happen after people are committed to something e.g. Kiwisaver
Basic fishing, without a barbed hook you rely too much on skill.

[mashman]

Market forces at the end of the day are the people.
No people, no stuff - no stuff, no money.
Markets collapse when money people think the general public care about something (e.g. repaying a morgage, buying new stuff). Soon as the public tune changes to "not caring" or "can't be bothered" there is no market - and it collapses.

Which is why the think tankers usually are invested in keeping people in the system, rather than exploiting it. The exploitations can happen after people are committed to something e.g. Kiwisaver
Basic fishing, without a barbed hook you rely too much on skill.

Aye, crossing our fingers and hoping for the best seems to be the way of the moronic. Bring on the collapse.

[Oscar]

:killingme... I see you brought your usual high standard of dickheadedness to the table :yawn:

Yes, you are a boring moron who has no wit.
Thank you for proving my point.

[mashman]

Yes, you are a boring moron who has no wit.
Thank you for proving my point.

Your assumption is that I was trying to be witty. You're a bit typical and predictable really.

[Oscar]

Your assumption is that I was trying to be witty. You're a bit typical and predictable really.

I assumed nothing.
I know you having nothing beyond a tedious habit of posting links to other people's opinions.
You've got nothing.

[mashman]

I assumed nothing.
I know you having nothing beyond a tedious habit of posting links to other people's opinions.
You've got nothing.

Of course you did. Denial isn't a good look chum.
I which case you know nothing. I savour that irony in every single one of your posts.
I'm savouring.

[Oscar]

Of course you did. Denial isn't a good look chum.
I which case you know nothing. I savour that irony in every single one of your posts.
I'm savouring.

What the fuck does that mean?
If I assumed nothing, how does that add up to denial?
IS English your first language?

You're making even less sense than usual.

I got some bling recently where you were characterised as a "slacktivist".
He's right, the world is full of fools like you who talk about how unjust the world is but never do anything about it.
So go on, post some more shit you found on the internet and whine about how mean the bogeyman is...

[mashman]

What the fuck does that mean?
If I assumed nothing, how does that add up to denial?
IS English your first language?

You're making even less sense than usual.

I got some bling recently where you were characterised as a "slacktivist".
He's right, the world is full of fools like you who talk about how unjust the world is but never do anything about it.
So go on, post some more shit you found on the internet and whine about how mean the bogeyman is...

Because you know you made an assumption and can't admit it.
:rofl:@slacktivist... quite right.
Aha, nothing at all.
I will.

[Oscar]

Because you know you made an assumption and can't admit it.
:rofl:@slacktivist... quite right.
Aha, nothing at all.
I will.

You said I assumed you were trying to witty.
I've seen the constant drivel you inflict on this forum, so I would never assume wit from you.

I tell you what, why don't you wait until you have something to say before you post again (as opposed to posting other people's opinions)?
Try using your words, like a big boy.
Or better yet, go and do something, and then come back and tell us about it...

[mashman]

You said I assumed you were trying to witty.
I've seen the constant drivel you inflict on this forum, so I would never assume wit from you.

I tell you what, why don't you wait until you have something to say before you post again (as opposed to posting other people's opinions)?
Try using your words, like a big boy.
Or better yet, go and do something, and then come back and tell us about it...

Oh... in which case I take it all back.

bwaaaaaa ha ha ha ha ha ha haaaaaaaaaa... fuck off Hitler.

[Oscar]

Oh... in which case I take it all back.

bwaaaaaa ha ha ha ha ha ha haaaaaaaaaa... fuck off Hitler.

Stop it.
You have proven yourself a witless fool on numerous occasions.
It's getting embarrassing.

Anyway, I claim the thread for Godwin, so fuck off loser...

[mashman]

Stop it.
You have proven yourself a witless fool on numerous occasions.
It's getting embarrassing.

Anyway, I claim the thread for Godwin, so fuck off loser...

Learn to get over it. I did.

Take it, I'm not in the slightest bit interested in getting into a pissing contest with you.

[Oscar]

Learn to get over it. I did.

Take it, I'm not in the slightest bit interested in getting into a pissing contest with you.

Now, that's funny.
Loser.

[Ocean1]

It's all other people's money.

No, it's not.

The misapprehension does explain your idiotic ideas about financial management though.

Just not very well.

[gwigs]

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/V3VRN9CP1OU?feature=player_detailpage" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>


Because you know you made an assumption and can't admit it.
:rofl:@slacktivist... quite right.
Aha, nothing at all.
I will.

I like Slacktivists.....:yes:

[gwigs]

[QUOTE=Oscar;1130560326]What the fuck does that mean?
If I assumed nothing, how does that add up to denial?
IS English your first language?




Where do you live...check your profile...?
A STATE OF DENIAL....DOH !!!

[Oscar]

[QUOTE=Oscar;1130560326]What the fuck does that mean?
If I assumed nothing, how does that add up to denial?
IS English your first language?




Where do you live...check your profile...?
A STATE OF DENIAL....DOH !!!

A pity you didn't check your formatting as well as you did the spelling.
Idjut.

[Brian d marge]

Kiwi biker
I can see how it works now , I couldn't get my head around the / a medium of exchange

It , the no currency is/has been tried before and is/has been successful in a village that starts with t in Devon England

I have just been on a bit of a trip around Japan by bicycle and I can say , clearly and very strongly
If you follow the current consumerist path without strong regulation , you WILL make NZ a unattractive place to live
The beaches here are a disgrace , its plastic and detritus from fishing

The roads are choked with trucks. Imagine a one horse town like , Ranfurly then drive 18 wheelers though the main street pretty much 24/7 ,,I'm NOT joking ,,,,that is what will happen if you do not regulate, it maybe cheap but it destroys the lives of those near the road ,,,,,and those away from the road for that matter

As for money , I completely agree it divorces one from another being , where as gifting humbles one to another ,
A traveller will understand

So we do need to reduce/ remove this consumerist society , take a step back and just start giving , imagine if u took a crate of homebrew beer over to those unruly mongrols over the fence.

You don't have to join in , but the relationship would change


As I've said many times before, if NZ works pon any type of fractional banking system and that fraction is above the rate of growth, you will get imbalances,
Also, due to international financial regulations changing , 1982 ish last one, there is a lot of international money looking for work to do

This imbalance ,among others , again ruins the lives of local people
Ask anyone from the pretty coastal towns around the south of England if they can afford to live there ??

As strange as it sounds , I think we do need to return to villages of around 150 people with a sense of community and the freedom to trust and help the neighbour,
It may involve some form of money, but the emphasis shouldn't be on that, rather the opposite,,,,,this would need a big shift in public thinking

I think it IS happpening , slowly , but IS happening

more public pressure and social awareness would help..IMHO

Stephen

[mashman]

Now, that's funny.
Loser.

Loser? I didn't realise we were competing.


No, it's not.

The misapprehension does explain your idiotic ideas about financial management though.

Just not very well.

Yes it is. The people who print the money own the money as was witnessed by them removing the savings of those in Cyprus.

Aha, financial management kills just about every sphere of human endeavor. I don't expect you to grasp that concept as it seem to be relatively new around these parts. However it seems that others have noticed it too.

I understand it fine, you understand it within its limits. So I'm not concerned at how valid you deem your understanding to be.

[mashman]

I like Slacktivists.....:yes:

Tis quite amazing what they can do when they get off the couch eh. Shame they don't get the press coverage that the political idol morons do. The times are a changin.

[Ocean1]

Yes it is. The people who print the money own the money as was witnessed by them removing the savings of those in Cyprus.

Best you give yours back to them then.

Idiot.


Aha, financial management kills just about every sphere of human endeavor.


No, that'd be losers that expect everyone else to pay for their lunch.


However it seems that others have noticed it too.

Aye, the world's full of fucking idiots.

[mashman]

Best you give yours back to them then.

Idiot.

They're taking it back slowly but surely.

Whambulance time.


No, that'd be losers that expect everyone else to pay for their lunch.

You expect people to pay for your lunch dontcha... the irony amongst the aged is never lost on me.


Aye, the world's full of fucking idiots.

And yet they're right. Makes you so called smart folk imbeciles, especially given that you have all of the knowledge.

[Ocean1]

They're taking it back slowly but surely.

That'd be because they're owed it, if you don't like it then don't borrow money.


You expect people to pay for your lunch dontcha...

Nope. Nobody ever has and nobody ever will.


And yet they're right. Makes you so called smart folk imbeciles, especially given that you have all of the knowledge.

The fuck they are. And I've generally found that those with a bit of knowledge tend to know a bit more.

Obviously not in your world.

[mashman]

That'd be because they're owed it, if you don't like it then don't borrow money.

They they do own it now? Make your mind up.



Nope. Nobody ever has and nobody ever will.

Oh dear :facepalm: You don't see the irony between what you have just said and the the first statement you made? I know you won't, because if you did, you'd understand the other side of the fence.



The fuck they are. And I've generally found that those with a bit of knowledge tend to know a bit more.

Obviously not in your world.

:killingme... you're assuming that that extra bit of knowledge is knowledge that is useful.

This guy (Einstein) might have disagreed with you and he was generally classed as a very smart guy "The true sign of intelligence is not knowledge but imagination.".

[Ocean1]

They they do own it now? Make your mind up.


Owed, fool. Hence the reference to not borrowing money you can't repay, y'know?

Nevermind, you obviously don't.



Oh dear :facepalm: You don't see the irony between what you have just said and the the first statement you made? I know you won't, because if you did, you'd understand the other side of the fence.

No. How about you explain it to me. In plain English. With no completely irrelevant references. And no monumentally fucked up presuppositions.



:killingme... you're assuming that that extra bit of knowledge is knowledge that is useful.

This guy (Einstein) might have disagreed with you and he was generally classed as a very smart guy "The true sign of intelligence is not knowledge but imagination.".

All knowledge is useful.

And I rather suspect he might have thought you were as big a fuckwit as the rest of us do.

[mashman]

Owed, fool. Hence the reference to not borrowing money you can't repay, y'know?

Nevermind, you obviously don't.

:facepalm: still failing to extrapolate past the point you choose eh. Where do you think your money came from?

Nevermind, you obviously don't know.



No. How about you explain it to me. In plain English. With no completely irrelevant references. And no monumentally fucked up presuppositions.

You failed to grasp my initial point, so you ain't gonna understand the irony. I'll pass and just enjoy the afterglow thanks.



All knowledge is useful.

And I rather suspect he might have thought you were as big a fuckwit as the rest of us do.

When it's applied correctly, yup, I agree.

:rofl: even if he would have, that still doesn't mean I'm wrong. Although he would have agreed with my assessment of the financial system as well as the solution being offered.

[Oscar]

Loser? I didn't realise we were competing.



We're not.
You're just making a complete twat of yourself, without any competition.
I wasn't a big fan of Godwins Rule, but when you fell foul of it, I realised what Godwin was getting at.
He was trying to save us from stupid people like you who lack the wit to argue at anything more than the basic level. So, inevitably, zealots and fools will invoke Godwin’s rule, as their lack of nuance, vocabulary and knowledge will kick in leading with nothing but childish epithets.



Yes it is. The people who print the money own the money as was witnessed by them removing the savings of those in Cyprus.

Aha, financial management kills just about every sphere of human endeavor. I don't expect you to grasp that concept as it seem to be relatively new around these parts. However it seems that others have noticed it too.

I understand it fine, you understand it within its limits. So I'm not concerned at how valid you deem your understanding to be.

Financial management kills human endeavor.
Now you've managed to be pompous and stupid - keep that up and you'll get elected to some public office.

So, you're saying that left to their own devices, and without financial management or resources, Fleming would have come up with penicillin?
NASA would have got to the moon?
Da Vinci had a rich patron to keep him from starving.
And so on...

[mashman]

We're not.
You're just making a complete twat of yourself, without any competition.
I wasn't a big fan of Godwins Rule, but when you fell foul of it, I realised what Godwin was getting at.
He was trying to save us from stupid people like you who lack the wit to argue at anything more than the basic level. So, inevitably, zealots and fools will invoke Godwin’s rule, as their lack of nuance, vocabulary and knowledge will kick in leading with nothing but childish epithets.

Typical, using other people's opinions to justify your position. Dripping with much irony.




Financial management kills human endeavor.
Now you've managed to be pompous and stupid - keep that up and you'll get elected to some public office.

So, you're saying that left to their own devices, and without financial management or resources, Fleming would have come up with penicillin?
NASA would have got to the moon?
Da Vinci had a rich patron to keep him from starving.
And so on...

Pompous and stupid? I'll accept the latter, but the former is all down to your interpretation old son.

Yes he would have come up with penicillin without financial management, although I fail to see why you've brought resources into it, coz he woulda needed them in the first place.
Yup, we would likely have been colonising by now.
If society had have been free he wouldn't have needed a rich patron in the first place.
And so on...

[Oscar]

Typical, using other people's opinions to justify your position. Dripping with much irony.



Irony? Not at all.
Perhaps (as I suspect) your reading comprehension is not up to much, so I'll repeat - I didn't think much of Godwins opinion, but you've helped me see his wisdom.
I'm not justifying my opinion, I'm stating it: You lack the mental acuity to argue your corner, even in as humble a forum as KB.




Pompous and stupid? I'll accept the latter, but the former is all down to your interpretation old son.

...

I'm glad you accept your state, as the rest of your post didn't make a lick of sense.

[scumdog]

All Mashy is trying to say is - we don't need cash.

But we do need 'commodities of exchange' for bartering, reward etc

So while Fleming might have still got there without money he would have needed a shit-load of 'commodities of exchange.'

And all those bolts of cloth, gold bricks, herds of pigs and boxes of bananas would have taken heaps of room. And not only that, all but the gold would detriorate over time (although you could gain interest be breeding the pigs I guess)

So having 'commodities of exchange' that looked like money would have been damned handy eh - no struggling to haul a weaner pig out of your pocket when you want to pay for the groceries!

[mashman]

All Mashy is trying to say is - we don't need cash.

But we do need 'commodities of exchange' for bartering, reward etc

So while Fleming might have still got there without money he would have needed a shit-load of 'commodities of exchange.'

And all those bolts of cloth, gold bricks, herds of pigs and boxes of bananas would have taken heaps of room. And not only that, all but the gold would detriorate over time (although you could gain interest be breeding the pigs I guess)

So having 'commodities of exchange' that looked like money would have been damned handy eh - no struggling to haul a weaner pig out of your pocket when you want to pay for the groceries!

No barter either as it's open to the same value distortions as cash. If people wish to barter individually that's entirely up to them, but there will be no need for it in regards to getting food, water, electricity, building, education, health etc... stuff that we all use. Fuckin pointless given that money/barter could hold up the production of any good/service.

[Oscar]

All Mashy is trying to say is - we don't need cash.

But we do need 'commodities of exchange' for bartering, reward etc

So while Fleming might have still got there without money he would have needed a shit-load of 'commodities of exchange.'

And all those bolts of cloth, gold bricks, herds of pigs and boxes of bananas would have taken heaps of room. And not only that, all but the gold would detriorate over time (although you could gain interest be breeding the pigs I guess)

So having 'commodities of exchange' that looked like money would have been damned handy eh - no struggling to haul a weaner pig out of your pocket when you want to pay for the groceries!

Wouldn't be a little bit tricky if you were trying to pay Goldstein the Dentist with your weiner pig?
Howsabout we pay him in gold?
And instead of arguing about how much the gold weighed or how fine it was, why don't break of disks of it and put a nice pic on it and then we could g'tee the number of carats....

EDIT - nice try, but it seems that barter is bad...

[scumdog]

Fuckin pointless given that money/barter could hold up the production of any good/service.

Don't worry - having to work for no immediate or intangible 'reward' will hold up production anyway - hence why we are not inundated with Mashman clones wanting to do away with cash.

[mashman]

Don't worry - having to work for no immediate or intangible 'reward' will hold up production anyway - hence why we are not inundated with Mashman clones wanting to do away with cash.

Really? So why isn't every demanding to be paid up front? You wouldn't do your job then? I'm believe that if people aren't offered the alternative, then they can't make the judgement and given that it is absolutely viable, don't you find it odd that it's never discussed?

[scumdog]

So I get paid in cash X-amount evry fortnight.
I know how many gallons of petrol I can buy with it etc - I can plan my budget knowing the X-amount is going to arrive in exactly two weeks timey, no problem.

But figuring out how many pigs, boxes of apples etc is suitable pay for my job and how to pay the guy at the gas staion (does he want a pig or three boxes of apples?) makes a problem

[mashman]

So I get paid in cash X-amount evry fortnight.
I know how many gallons of petrol I can buy with it etc - I can plan my budget knowing the X-amount is going to arrive in exactly two weeks timey, no problem.

But figuring out how many pigs, boxes of apples etc is suitable pay for my job and how to pay the guy at the gas staion (does he want a pig or three boxes of apples?) makes a problem

So you're still bartering then. Fair enough. I'll use the free fuel. Oooo, deja vu.

[Brian d marge]

So I get paid in cash X-amount evry fortnight.
I know how many gallons of petrol I can buy with it etc - I can plan my budget knowing the X-amount is going to arrive in exactly two weeks timey, no problem.

But figuring out how many pigs, boxes of apples etc is suitable pay for my job and how to pay the guy at the gas staion (does he want a pig or three boxes of apples?) makes a problem

Question.

what would you do if I GAVE you your fuel for the week , no charge , no strings ,,,I just give it to you

Stephen

[scumdog]

Question.

what would you do if I GAVE you your fuel for the week , no charge , no strings ,,,I just give it to you

Stephen

Voice my gratitude?

[Drew]

Another shit slinging thread I missed. DAMN IT!

I live week to week. People like me make up a substantial demographic. We would not give up a cash system and work for free, in exchange for free stuff. It is a leap of faith in the rest of the population, where the potential loss is too great.

The idea is flawed anyway, because of human greed, the bulk of people would take more than they need or gave.

Ummm, cunts!

[scumdog]

Another shit slinging thread I missed. DAMN IT!

I live week to week. People like me make up a substantial demographic. We would not give up a cash system and work for free, in exchange for free stuff. It is a leap of faith in the rest of the population, where the potential loss is too great.

The idea is flawed anyway, because of human greed, the bulk of people would take more than they need or gave.

Ummm, cunts!

Been trying to tell Mashy that for yonks.

I ain't getting the message through - I doubt you will succeed either...

[Drew]

Been trying to tell Mashy that for yonks.

I ain't getting the message through - I doubt you will succeed either...Ah well. It's nice to not be the one missing the point for once anyway.

[mashman]

Another shit slinging thread I missed. DAMN IT!

I live week to week. People like me make up a substantial demographic. We would not give up a cash system and work for free, in exchange for free stuff. It is a leap of faith in the rest of the population, where the potential loss is too great.

The idea is flawed anyway, because of human greed, the bulk of people would take more than they need or gave.

Ummm, cunts!

So no real difference to now then huh? Do you reckon those 50% of the poll who said that they would live in such a society are worried about their "loss" given the potential gains?

You're just another scaredy cat chicken shit mutha fucka. Having said that, heh, what percentage of the current population are greedy? It is a leap of faith and one that's not only worth taking, but one that we sorely need to get out of the current mire. But each to their own. Perhaps you underestimate how people would react given that their needs are catered for?

[mashman]

Been trying to tell Mashy that for yonks.

I ain't getting the message through - I doubt you will succeed either...

:killingme... tell me some more how everyone is just going to suddenly become so self interested they'll rape the country and shoot themselves in the foot at the same time. Go on. Coz you're telling me that it is impossible because human beings are incapable of cooperating without incentive. Which just so happens to be bullshit. Some people work exceptionally shitty, exceptionally important and exceptionally poorly paid jobs and yet they still do it. I wonder why anyone would choose to work in their respective fields? It must be the money aye :facepalm:

[Drew]

So no real difference to now then huh? Do you reckon those 50% of the poll who said that they would live in such a society are worried about their "loss" given the potential gains?

You're just another scaredy cat chicken shit mutha fucka. Having said that, heh, what percentage of the current population are greedy? It is a leap of faith and one that's not only worth taking, but one that we sorely need to get out of the current mire. But each to their own. Perhaps you underestimate how people would react given that their needs are catered for?

You deny then, that there would be an immediate drop in productivity? From people taking a tank of gas in their bike and going out for a hoon on a nice Tuesday morning, because they can.

They would wake up to the situation eventually...maybe. But until then, things would get much worse than they are right now. At which point, people would start slamming the system worse than what happens now, and whatever good intentions that prompted the change would be forgotten.

Question. Why should the driven and hardworking people out there. Who have amassed some semblance of security in their efforts, have to give everything away? Lots of cases of people working twice as hard as they needed to, so they can later do half as much as everyone else, lose big time.

The idea cannot stand up, to human nature. Desire is what drives humans I think. Give them nothing to want, and we're all fucked.

[Drew]

:killingme... tell me some more how everyone is just going to suddenly become so self interested they'll rape the country and shoot themselves in the foot at the same time. Go on. Coz you're telling me that it is impossible because human beings are incapable of cooperating without incentive. Which just so happens to be bullshit. Some people work exceptionally shitty, exceptionally important and exceptionally poorly paid jobs and yet they still do it. I wonder why anyone would choose to work in their respective fields? It must be the money aye :facepalm:

This whole thing (which there is no fuckin way I'm reading by the way), is a piss take aye? You can't seriously not understand that the exploitation of people willing to do a job, because they didn't upskill enough to get out of it, is how society is structured.

Few do the jobs you describe for life. But there are always people who have no choice but to do them at the time. So they circulate through those jobs and others, trying to better their situation.

This is basic shit man, if I can get it, you should be able to also.

[mashman]

You deny then, that there would be an immediate drop in productivity? From people taking a tank of gas in their bike and going out for a hoon on a nice Tuesday morning, because they can.

They would wake up to the situation eventually...maybe. But until then, things would get much worse than they are right now. At which point, people would start slamming the system worse than what happens now, and whatever good intentions that prompted the change would be forgotten.

Question. Why should the driven and hardworking people out there. Who have amassed some semblance of security in their efforts, have to give everything away? Lots of cases of people working twice as hard as they needed to, so they can later do half as much as everyone else, lose big time.

The idea cannot stand up, to human nature. Desire is what drives humans I think. Give them nothing to want, and we're all fucked.

If a job isn't that essential, then I see little reason why people shouldn't make the choice to go for a ride instead of just sitting around doing nothing.

Very true... although it would defeat the purpose of having voted for it in the first place and we'd end up back with a financial system. That being the case, people would understand what is expected of them which should mitigate the "free loading" that you're so worried about. Sure there will be those who'll go nuts, but there are people who currently do that anyway and I don't see anyone complaining about that. I do see them complaining about the corruption that accompanies it though.

There's also lots of people working twice as hard as they need to to put food on the table and clothes on kids backs. Yet you seem to think that that is acceptable? However in answer to your question, I realise I can do just that i.e. work less, now as well as in my old age because there are so many jobs that really are unrequired. Mine certainly is as there are thousands of developers out there writing the same code as I do. What is anyone going to lose big time?

Wubbish. If human nature exists, which it doesn't, then we're all just as capable as the next person in regards to our range of emotions and decision making ability and given that I, and not just me by any means, would happily "give up what I have" (I get to keep what I have, which is no more than anyone else really), then it's more than possible for others to do the same given the option. We'll not turn into zombies, we'll do quite the opposite, history and human innovation is not driven by financial gain, it is driven by fulfilling need.

[mashman]

This whole thing (which there is no fuckin way I'm reading by the way), is a piss take aye? You can't seriously not understand that the exploitation of people willing to do a job, because they didn't upskill enough to get out of it, is how society is structured.

Few do the jobs you describe for life. But there are always people who have no choice but to do them at the time. So they circulate through those jobs and others, trying to better their situation.

This is basic shit man, if I can get it, you should be able to also.

And what job do they go to when they upskill? Every job that there is is filled, so every person that upskills and moves into a job displaces someone else from that job. You don't grasp that? Other than new jobs being created, that is a factoid. Society is not structured to make the best use of human beings, it is structured to make money for people, another factoid, otherwise the dole would be littered with people. How much shit is created just because it can be and made to be disposable instead of reused? It's a money making scam and yes, society is structured to keep some people down. Keep them busy enough and they can't do a fucking thing easily at all. That's a simple waste.

And that is a bullshit way for anyone to have to live. Looking after the elderly isn't important? The average salary is 50k, what do you think the mean salary is going to be? And according to Ocean, 55% (I think was the figure he quoted) of people are a net draw from the govt. So plenty of people are in those jobs.

:rofl: oh I get it and I think it's fuckin stupid. Hence I offer something else, obviously something you won't consider because you don't have trust in people. Given the current circumstances and how we do things, I'm not surprised, but changing how things are done and the reasons for doing them will have a positive reaction from people, I'm damned sure of it.

[Drew]

So in order for your system to work, people need to have no human nature trending toward self gratification and desire, and also for them to trust in the rest of humanity.

FAIL.

You're alternative can only be met with trepidation. Because we see daily the evidence of self service. How else would there be the rich, standing on the heads of the poor, to keep them down.

You make both sides of the argument yourself, in a lot of your posts.

Jog on.

[Ocean1]

Ah well. It's nice to not be the one missing the point for once anyway.

Mate, compared to mushman you're a fucking amateur.

[avgas]

You deny then, that there would be an immediate drop in productivity? From people taking a tank of gas in their bike and going out for a hoon on a nice Tuesday morning, because they can.

They would wake up to the situation eventually...
I would sleep more. I love sleep.
Remove money - remove my requirement to miss out on sleep.

[mashman]

So in order for your system to work, people need to have no human nature trending toward self gratification and desire, and also for them to trust in the rest of humanity.

FAIL.

You're alternative can only be met with trepidation. Because we see daily the evidence of self service. How else would there be the rich, standing on the heads of the poor, to keep them down.

You make both sides of the argument yourself, in a lot of your posts.

Jog on.

That's a choice, nothing to do with "human nature". You can choose what gratifies you. If it goes against the rules of society, it's called a crime. Yes, trusting human beings can be hard for way too many people, but I do and the vast majority of them aren't let downs either. Perhaps you've had the opposite experience with people? What percentage of people that you have interacted with have let you down/ripped you off?

FLAIL.

What evidence of self-service? It can only happen in a financial economy... in fact it always has happened in a financial economy, coz you can't get "rich" when there isn't money to get rich from (if you are equating lots of money to being rich that is).

I know I do, that's because I understand both sides of the argument, which makes one of us ;)

Wax off.

[Woodman]

So in order for your system to work, people need to have no human nature trending toward self gratification and desire, and also for them to trust in the rest of humanity.

FAIL.

You're alternative can only be met with trepidation. Because we see daily the evidence of self service. How else would there be the rich, standing on the heads of the poor, to keep them down.

You make both sides of the argument yourself, in a lot of your posts.

Jog on.

What I want to know is what happens on planet mashman when an operative does start to show some human nature/instinct/personality. Will there be "equalizers" in scary uniforms to dumb them down or make them disappear.

[mashman]

What I want to know is what happens on planet mashman when an operative does start to show some human nature/instinct/personality. Will there be "equalizers" in scary uniforms to dumb them down or make them disappear.

:killingme... they'll simply be killed... and given the advanced "state" of surveillance tech will have courtesy of the financial system and its overlords, we'll know it before you do and won't waste energy on rehabilitation, we'll just remove you from the gene pool along with your entire family. It will be as if you never existed. Or we'll all be free individuals and those with money "withdrawals" will be looked after by a buddy. I'll be your buddy, coz you're funny.

Still waiting for this human nature thing to be explained coherently.

[scumdog]

Still waiting for this human nature thing to be explained coherently.

You need to meet more of these humans - 'speciall the ones I meet.

[Ocean1]

What I want to know is what happens on planet mashman when an operative does start to show some human nature/instinct/personality. Will there be "equalizers" in scary uniforms to dumb them down or make them disappear.

There's been mention of a "committee"... :shifty:

[mashman]

You need to meet more of these humans - 'speciall the ones I meet.

I lived amongst those humans for 6 years in an ex-gangster street of Glasgow.

[Brian d marge]

There's been mention of a "committee"... :shifty:


the most insidious form of Human, those that form "committees"

Stephen

[Drew]

the most insidious form of Human, those that form "committees"

StephenI heard that lots of them are bloggers...Oh, sorry.

[mashman]

Something written by someone on an entirely unrelated subject that sums up how easy it would be to change the world.

"One of the major roots of these worldly problems is the concept of hierarchy. Everywhere we look in the world, we have (usually male-dominated) hierarchical systems of organization. Hierarchy is an insidious, disempowering system of authority, obedience and enslavement that we MUST transcend.

Transcending hierarchy is a process of self-liberation / clearing, gaining self-knowledge, gaining knowledge of Universal and Earthly Natural Law, and exercising our Sovereign Will. First, we have to KNOW through and through that we are fully connected extensions of the Divine Infinite Source of all creation. When we know that, not just think it on an intellectual level, we realize that there is NO legitimate authority outside of ourselves. There is only inner authority and self-governance, which when guided by understanding of Universal Law prohibits us from instigating actions that would harm another.

Enlightened Self-Governance and adherence to Universal Law is the foundation for a free society. Only with this foundation in place will we be able to avoid the ego trap of exerting "authority" over others to control and regulate their behaviors which do not harm anyone else.

Only through Enlightened Self-Governance will we be able to build an entirely new type of society that is self-organized to solve problems and see to the needs of the many as a genuine expression of the desire to cooperate and make a world that benefits everyone. This has to be an ever-evolving, co-creative process that we will continually discover as we engage it.

Every idea needs to be tested and applied where it is willing to be accepted in an open-source manner through voluntary participation of all individuals involved in a non-hierarchical, uni-level, self-organizing process. This requires an entirely new way of thinking, organizing and taking action, and all old models of centralized, top-down authority need to be abandoned, because as we have already seen, any attempts to impose a single "best system" onto the world will always result in oppression and will ultimately fail.

We have within us the potential to FREE every single human being from the shackles of enslaving systems of hierarchy and external authority, to work together and create solutions to provide the basic needs of food, water, power, shelter, clothing, transportation and knowledge to EVERYONE on the planet. Creating self-generating systems to support all of these needs is totally achievable, but only if we can cooperate as sovereign individuals who respect the rights and boundaries of others.

Such a shift in our world depends on all of us to know that we are Sovereign, to proclaim our Sovereignty, delete our slave-think programming, and then to work together in cooperation as Sovereign individuals with a common goal of maximal empowerment of everyone on the planet."

The system must be changed in order to offer the people a reason to change.

[Akzle]

The system must be changed in order to offer the people a reason to change.

did you add that bit?

The system must go.
The system is the manifestation of common irresponsibility. I view as a disease.

People need to find health, mentally, emotionally, societalarily, noundjectively.

Weeeeeeeeeeeeeed!

[Ocean1]

We have within us the potential to FREE every single human being from the shackles of enslaving systems of hierarchy and external authority, to work together and create solutions to provide the basic needs of food, water, power, shelter, clothing, transportation and knowledge to EVERYONE on the planet.

Damned right. So, when is all the dole bludgers going to take it upon their own recognisance to jet back from Brizvegas and carry their share of this wonderful utopia?

Only, EVERYONE ELSE on the planet’s been waiting a while, now.

[mashman]

did you add that bit?

The system must go.
The system is the manifestation of common irresponsibility. I view as a disease.

People need to find health, mentally, emotionally, societalarily, noundjectively.

Weeeeeeeeeeeeeed!

I did add that bit and yup, the system must go... unfortunately it will need to be weeded out and not chopped off at the roots. Making it irrelevant to people's lives has the same effect as removing it entirely... but with less of a global impact. The rest of the world will follow suit and I shall be heralded as the man that saved the world... and I will be so revered I will be set above all others to wallow in bitches and cocaine until then end of time. So sayeth the Gord.


Damned right. So, when is all the dole bludgers going to take it upon their own recognisance to jet back from Brizvegas and carry their share of this wonderful utopia?

Only, EVERYONE ELSE on the planet’s been waiting a while, now.

:killingme... Einstein classes you as insane. I'm inclined to agree.

[MVnut]

Some see the idea a pure pie in the sky. But i'm curious. There are 50,000,000 registered people (give or take) around the world that agree that a financial system is not necessary. Sorry if I've left any options out.

I hope this is a joke

[mashman]

I hope this is a joke

Why?..............

[Brian d marge]

Damned right. So, when is all the dole bludgers going to take it upon their own recognisance to jet back from Brizvegas and carry their share of this wonderful utopia?

Only, EVERYONE ELSE on the planet’s been waiting a while, now.
You do realize that over half of the people receiving public money are the oldies and those dole bludgers only account for just over a 1/4

So if those bludgers were to stop it would save how much >? .....

You really do fall hook line and sinker for anything the TV says

Stephen

[Akzle]

You do realize that over half of the people receiving public money are the oldies and those dole bludgers only account for just over a 1/4

So if those bludgers were to stop it would save how much >? .....

You really do fall hook line and sinker for anything the TV says

Stephen

whatsmore the largest chunk of public purse pays politicians. Dunno about you, but i dun rekn they earn it.
Also. Name 10 of the cunts. Just try. Theres two hunnit something portfolios, near as many seats.
Guess what minimum salary (thats before free taxis, air travel, hotels, food etc, y'know, tax free fringe benefits) is?
We're talking jewmoney here. Heaps.

and youre going to moan about doleys?
Ignorant, man, and fuken dumb. At least they serve to keep inflation down, what economic benefit in politicians??

[Ocean1]

You do realize that over half of the people receiving public money are the oldies...

Which is entirely appropriate, given that they're responsible for most of the tax revenue in the first place.

Wiki:
Baby Boomers control over 80% of personal financial assets and more than 50% of discretionary spending power., July 2011 They are responsible for more than half of all consumer spending, buy 77% of all prescription drugs, 61% of OTC medication and 80% of all leisure travel.


and those dole bludgers only account for just over a 1/4

So if those bludgers were to stop it would save how much >? .....

Actually, well over half of NZers recieve more in benefits than they contribute in tax.

So the answer to your question is fucking shitloads.

Enough, in fact to pay for those that actually need help. Y'know, the ones WINZ and ACC routinely deny help because they can't afford it?


You really do fall hook line and sinker for anything the TV says

I don't watch TV.

If I did would I be as wrong about shit as you routinely are?

[Brian d marge]

Which is entirely appropriate, given that they're responsible for most of the tax revenue in the first place.

Wiki:
Baby Boomers control over 80% of personal financial assets and more than 50% of discretionary spending power., July 2011 They are responsible for more than half of all consumer spending, buy 77% of all prescription drugs, 61% of OTC medication and 80% of all leisure travel.



Actually, well over half of NZers recieve more in benefits than they contribute in tax.

So the answer to your question is fucking shitloads.

Enough, in fact to pay for those that actually need help. Y'know, the ones WINZ and ACC routinely deny help because they can't afford it?



I don't watch TV.

If I did would I be as wrong about shit as you routinely are?

ookaaaay

So the people that buil their wealth through the boom times , and paid their taxes get a pension ( as it should be )

But then the rules changed

user pays etc ,,,,,,student loans etc

This effectively denys a/ the next generation to aquire wealth ( either in the form of assest of whatever) Which is what has happened .

Now heres the rub , On the one hand you should be fully entitled to a pension if you have played the game , but on the other hand the next generation should be dealt the same cards as you were ( the cards that allowed you to create the discreasionary spending power)

back in 5 this computer is about to crash

Stephen

keep reading stuff , its very informative

[Ocean1]

ookaaaay

So the people that buil their wealth through the boom times , and paid their taxes get a pension ( as it should be )

Oh, the boom times were just luck, then? Nothing to do with huge improvements in productivity? Fuck all to do with the people actually working during that time?


But then the rules changed

user pays etc ,,,,,,student loans etc

This effectively denys a/ the next generation to aquire wealth ( either in the form of assest of whatever) Which is what has happened .

The fuck it does, those “free” educations were still paid for by those taxpayers. If that “free education” was all it took to create those boom times then how can it be that the cost of education today is some sort of barrier to wealth? Smells like bullshit to me.


Now heres the rub , On the one hand you should be fully entitled to a pension if you have played the game , but on the other hand the next generation should be dealt the same cards as you were ( the cards that allowed you to create the discreasionary spending power)

The cards are the same. Produce a dollar’s worth of value and make a dollar. Same now as then. If there’s funding shortfalls for social welfare spending now that didn’t exist then you can blame it on the massive growth in social welfare spending and a lack of productivity to match, fuck all else.

[Brian d marge]

Im tapping this out on the phone so ill be brief

The boom times corrisponded with the demand for wool during the korean war off top of head the gdp per person has dropped ever since

Yes someone has to pay for education but when the community foots the bill the cost is spread but when the individual pays that person foots the entire amount also living costs which may or may not apply
Either way the cost for the individual inceases
Try not to say if they get a job they can pay it back bla blah

As for funding shortfalls times and costs have changed for a start that dollar doesnt buy so much nowadays
The bulk of the social welfare （ over half ) as i said is spent on the oldies the ones according to u have the most discretionary spending

Spend a few min research and take your blinkers off

Stephen


Sent from my SC-01F using Tapatalk

[Ocean1]

Im tapping this out on the phone so ill be brief

The boom times corrisponded with the demand for wool during the korean war off top of head the gdp per person has dropped ever since

Yes someone has to pay for education but when the community foots the bill the cost is spread but when the individual pays that person foots the entire amount also living costs which may or may not apply
Either way the cost for the individual inceases
Try not to say if they get a job they can pay it back bla blah

As for funding shortfalls times and costs have changed for a startthat dollardoesnt buy so much nowadays
The bulck of the social welfare （ over half ) as i said is spent on the oldies the ones according to u have themost descretionary spending

Spend a few min research and take your blinkers off

Stephen


Sent from my SC-01F using Tapatalk

We've just done that shit, repeating the same crap ad nausium don't make it so.

We've also done the "dollar doesn't buy as much" shit. That's not true either, try to keep up.

[Brian d marge]

Yes but form some reason you just refuse to take your blinkers off
Its like your afraid of what really is going on
Stephen

Sent from my SC-01F using Tapatalk

[Ocean1]

Yes but form some reason you just refuse to take your blinkers off
Its like your afraid of what really is going on
Stephen

Sent from my SC-01F using Tapatalk

Nothing wrong with my vision dude. If you want to change my opinion then show me something different, because so far none of your complaints hold water.

[mashman]

Nothing wrong with my vision dude.

I guess rose tinted specs for myopia do serve a purpose after all.

[Ocean1]

I guess rose tinted specs for myopia do serve a purpose after all.

You keep 'em dude, they're probably the only thing stopping you from slitting your wrists.

[mashman]

You keep 'em dude, they're probably the only thing stopping you from slitting your wrists.

That was poor. I'm closer to slitting yours than mine.

[Brian d marge]

We've also done the "dollar doesn't buy as much" shit. That's not true either, try to keep up.

Not my fault you dont understand inflation

either that or it doesnt happen in your universe


Stephen

[mashman]

NOW who does this remind me of, hmmmmmmm (http://www.pieria.co.uk/articles/mercantilism_six_centuries_of_vilifying_the_poor)

[Ocean1]

NOW who does this remind me of, hmmmmmmm (http://www.pieria.co.uk/articles/mercantilism_six_centuries_of_vilifying_the_poor)

The whining sounds exactly like you.

[mashman]

The whining sounds exactly like you.

Thanks.....

[mashman]

The Auckland Council's $7 billion debt is costing $1 million a day in interest alone. (https://nz.finance.yahoo.com/news/aucklands-daily-debt-reaches-1m-012002212--spt.html)... That sort of pointless shit would become a thing of the past.

[Ocean1]

That sort of pointless shit would become a thing of the past.

Aye, as would the civilisation you dislike so much.

If Orks is in the hole to the tune of 2 years total revenue then the reason has fuck all to do with too much money, has it? It's to do with spending less than you earn, same trick that fixes every economic issue.

[Akzle]

Aye, as would the civilisation you dislike so much.

If Orks is in the hole to the tune of 2 years total revenue then the reason has fuck all to do with too much money, has it? It's to do with spending less than you earn, same trick that fixes every economic issue.

weeeee-eeeellllll son, let me tell you this funny story, about how the "money" you're talking about is actually debt, and that you will never, ever, ever fucking ever repay that shit, because the jews that make money don't make enough for you to have enough to repay.

have i mentioned the earth-sized spheres of gold? seventy something of the cunts, to repay the debt that's been created with jew "money".


good luck sunshine.

[Ocean1]

weeeee-eeeellllll son, let me tell you this funny story, about how the "money" you're talking about is actually debt, and that you will never, ever, ever fucking ever repay that shit, because the jews that make money don't make enough for you to have enough to repay.

have i mentioned the earth-sized spheres of gold? seventy something of the cunts, to repay the debt that's been created with jew "money".


good luck sunshine.

Aye, you're right.

The RBNZ is in debt to me to the tune of whatever cash I happen to own atm.

That's the way it works, dude, no luck required whatsoever, the trick is to be on the right side of the ledger. Think I mentioned how to organise that didn't I? Spend less than you earn.

Simple, although losing the attitude wouldn't hurt, boy.

[Akzle]

Aye, you're right.

The RBNZ is in debt to me to the tune of whatever cash I happen to own atm.

That's the way it works, dude, no luck required whatsoever, the trick is to be on the right side of the ledger. Think I mentioned how to organise that didn't I? Spend less than you earn.

Simple, although losing the attitude wouldn't hurt, boy.

you seem confused or misguided about the whole "cash" thing. you don't own it. you're allowed to use it.
allowed,
by jews.

and if they change their mind, or want to impose some Ts and Cs (like, you're not allowed to buy drugs, or, do illegal shit with it) - you have no choice bt to abide them, because they make dem rulez.

blue is the color of corporations (wonder why you sign shit in blue ink?) red is the color of... gee, blood?, purple, well, those would be crown seals, innit? black... black black black, whatever could black represent, on the face of an instrument?

when you're in "the black" you're in debt. when you're in the red... well...

some learning, old man. try it.

[mashman]

Aye, as would the civilisation you dislike so much.

If Orks is in the hole to the tune of 2 years total revenue then the reason has fuck all to do with too much money, has it? It's to do with spending less than you earn, same trick that fixes every economic issue.

Well, duh.

Who said anything about too much money? :killingme... where one country goes out of debt another goes further into debt. Where one person goes out of debt another person goes in to debt... and according to the bloke on the TV and his pet mouse carrying the moneywasteometer, some debt is required. In that case, damn right I can't wait to get rid of what you foolishly class as civilisation. Bunch of entitlement complex knuckle draggers that ya'll are.

[Woodman]

you seem confused or misguided about the whole "cash" thing. you don't own it. you're allowed to use it.
allowed,
by jews.

and if they change their mind, or want to impose some Ts and Cs (like, you're not allowed to buy drugs, or, do illegal shit with it) - you have no choice bt to abide them, because they make dem rulez.

blue is the color of corporations (wonder why you sign shit in blue ink?) red is the color of... gee, blood?, purple, well, those would be crown seals, innit? black... black black black, whatever could black represent, on the face of an instrument?

when you're in "the black" you're in debt. when you're in the red... well...

some learning, old man. try it.

Just cos you stocked up on legal highs , it doesn't mean you have to take them all at once.

[Akzle]

Just cos you stocked up on legal highs , it doesn't mean you have to take them all at once.

you, and all, for that learning.

[Ocean1]

you seem confused or misguided about the whole "cash" thing. you don't own it. you're allowed to use it.
allowed,
by jews.

and if they change their mind, or want to impose some Ts and Cs (like, you're not allowed to buy drugs, or, do illegal shit with it) - you have no choice bt to abide them, because they make dem rulez.

blue is the color of corporations (wonder why you sign shit in blue ink?) red is the color of... gee, blood?, purple, well, those would be crown seals, innit? black... black black black, whatever could black represent, on the face of an instrument?

when you're in "the black" you're in debt. when you're in the red... well...

some learning, old man. try it.

Allow me to impart one of my more useful illusions: Who has the cash makes the rules.

If you find there's a lot of rulez encumbering your life it's probably because you're working in the red.

Red is for loser.

[Ocean1]

Well, duh.

Who said anything about too much money? :killingme... where one country goes out of debt another goes further into debt. Where one person goes out of debt another person goes in to debt... and according to the bloke on the TV and his pet mouse carrying the moneywasteometer, some debt is required. In that case, damn right I can't wait to get rid of what you foolishly class as civilisation. Bunch of entitlement complex knuckle draggers that ya'll are.

You say little else.

You don't listen worth shit though.

[mashman]

You say little else.

You don't listen worth shit though.

It's called truth. I leave the other shit up to the wizards of deception and their marketing and advertising bureau. Gotta say, in some strange way I respect their work, not only because you wouldn't be half as funny if it weren't for them, but that they can enslave nearly an entire planet into believing that they are free, that they can get out of debt and that the money they "earn" and the property "have" is owned by noone other than themselves.

Of course I do, buchur gonna have to have something worth listening too first... which you don't.

[Akzle]

Allow me to impart one of my more useful illusions: Who has the cash makes the rules.

If you find there's a lot of rulez encumbering your life it's probably because you're working in the red.

Red is for loser.

i find very few rules. Im not in any 'debt', by your comprehension.
What an unfortunate attitude you keep.

[Ocean1]

What an unfortunate attitude you keep.

Meh. The earn more than you spend attitude applies to more than just money dude, it's the single largest factor for success in any field, and if you find that attitude distasteful then I'd call that unfortunate.

[Akzle]

Meh. The earn more than you spend attitude applies to more than just money dude, it's the single largest factor for success in any field, and if you find that attitude distasteful then I'd call that unfortunate.

the point is about a nautical mile off your starboard gunnel. Aft like.

But you get half a bonus point for getting metaphorical.

[Ocean1]

the point is about a nautical mile off your starboard gunnel. Aft like.

It was my point. It was even demonstrably relevant and correct.

You're the one introducing the funny stories.

[Akzle]

It was my point. It was even demonstrably relevant and correct.

You're the one introducing the funny stories.

perhaps i've been unclear.

http://rybkaforum.net/mwf/rybkaattach/58/240058/Point_missed.jpg

[Ocean1]

perhaps i've been unclear.

Seems to come with the handle.

[mashman]

Imagine what a free country could attract. (http://m.washingtonpost.com/blogs/innovations/wp/2014/06/11/chile-teaches-the-world-a-lesson-about-innovation)

[BoristheBiter]

Imagine what a free country could attract. (http://m.washingtonpost.com/blogs/innovations/wp/2014/06/11/chile-teaches-the-world-a-lesson-about-innovation)

Fuck all.:killingme

No incentive, no people, nothing gets done.
It took $40k and a free ride for people to go to Chile.

Carry on dreaming Mashy, one day the white coated men will find you.

[Brian d marge]

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/Y3y3oxheIlo" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

wot a strange idea

Stephen

[Akzle]

Imagine what a free country could attract.

jews
. .

[BoristheBiter]

jews
. .

Why don't you use the words greedy people? or are you just after the reaction in a veiled attempt for someone to respond to you?

But yes, there will always be those that want a free ride, those that want to own the ride, and those that are just happy to sit on top and complain about the colour.

It is similar to what is happening in Iraq.
A minority of persecuted peoples have taken up arms and the majority just run away and expected someone else to save them.

It is these people (types) way of thinking/inaction that is needed to be changed in order for things to change.

[mashman]

wot a strange idea

Stephen

lol... who would have ever thought that cooperation might work as a solution. I see no choice in the matter.

Funny really, the majority (I reckon) will have been taught to share by their parents. What happened?


jews
. .

Meh... small percentage of people that society will weed out in a heartbeat. It may be a little bit Clockwork Orange for some, heh.

[mashman]

Fuck all.:killingme

No incentive, no people, nothing gets done.
It took $40k and a free ride for people to go to Chile.

Carry on dreaming Mashy, one day the white coated men will find you.

Think bigger.

Plenty of incentive, a country full of people, everything will get done.
Good for them... but I doubt the primary motivation was money for some reason.

I have a dream.

[mashman]

Why don't you use the words greedy people? or are you just after the reaction in a veiled attempt for someone to respond to you?

But yes, there will always be those that want a free ride, those that want to own the ride, and those that are just happy to sit on top and complain about the colour.

It is similar to what is happening in Iraq.
A minority of persecuted peoples have taken up arms and the majority just run away and expected someone else to save them.

It is these people (types) way of thinking/inaction that is needed to be changed in order for things to change.

Coz greed is merely one ugly facet. I reckon he might be after a little understanding when it comes to you reading the word "jew". Then again, he is a dick.

We don't need your money, money, money
We just wanna make the world dance,
Forget about the price tag

I'm glad there is inaction, in fact I'd argue that that inaction is support for those who are doing something to affect change by applying action, which would mean that they aren't terrorists?... they also likely have work in the morning so that they can feed their families.

Better than the current level of thinking that greets ideas with a balance sheet and a gun.

[Oscar]

Coz greed is merely one ugly facet. I reckon he might be after a little understanding when it comes to you reading the word "jew". Then again, he is a dick.

We don't need your money, money, money
We just wanna make the world dance,
Forget about the price tag

I'm glad there is inaction, in fact I'd argue that that inaction is support for those who are doing something to affect change by applying action, which would mean that they aren't terrorists?... they also likely have work in the morning so that they can feed their families.

Better than the current level of thinking that greets ideas with a balance sheet and a gun.

Antisemetic cunt. I don'care what YOU think the word means, Jew is a noun and "jew" is an offensive adjective as you use it. It gives a lot of insight into your fetid little world.

[Akzle]

Why don't you use the words greedy people? or are you just after the reaction in a veiled attempt for someone to respond to you?

But yes, there will always be those that want a free ride, those that want to own the ride, and those that are just happy to sit on top and complain about the colour.

It is similar to what is happening in Iraq.
A minority of persecuted peoples have taken up arms and the majority just run away and expected someone else to save them.

It is these people (types) way of thinking/inaction that is needed to be changed in order for things to change.
find me a 3 letter summation. i use gew when i think necessary, but in this instance, the question was valid, and was referring to Jewish Jews.

not that iraq has anything to do with this, but their society has been destroyed by a well funded military and quasi-military occupation over the last decade or so.
kindegartens bombed, hospitals levelled, cluster bombs, and good old bullets and shells. (by the jewSA, incase you're that fucking stupid),
you may not comprehend just what that means for day to day living, you seem to lack any empathy or intelligence whatever,
not everyone wants to fight for existence. certainement, since the jewSA fucked them up, i hold them about 99.3 percent responsible for un-fucking shit up.
"take only photos leave only footprints" or "make the world a better pace as you go" kind of mentality.

are people so stupid that they've forgotten the US has been in iraq for a decade? it doesn't seem to be so widely reported, now that the iraqi's are actually asking for some "freedom" and "defending against terrorists"... weren't these the noble reasons behind the jewSA's crusade?

to quote a wise, though white, git: stupid fucking humans!

[Akzle]

Antisemetic cunt.

no, he's not, you fucking moron.

so how 'bout put your big boy pants on and actually respond to points-valide, rather than dismissing every shit with namecalling.

cunt.

[Oscar]

no, he's not, you fucking moron.

so how 'bout put your big boy pants on and actually respond to points-valide, rather than dismissing every shit with namecalling.

cunt.

You are quite stupid, aren't you?
His post was about his use of a word, which I responded too.
You have a fucking nerve complaining about name calling, too.

[Akzle]

You are quite stupid, aren't you?
His post was about his use of a word, which I responded too.
You have a fucking nerve complaining about name calling, too.

i'm not going to bother explaining it to you again. it's been explained to you, what, ten times now?

i fully back things up before namecalling. it just gives it that extra.... something.

[unstuck]

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/8x9j_DKsaxg" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>:Punk::Punk:

[Voltaire]

Sensible discussion on KB is like two bald men fighting over a comb.
I voted yes.

[Akzle]

Sensible discussion on KB is like two bald men fighting over a comb.
I voted yes.

there's 4 more people voting yes than no. that makes a democratic majority.


so. fuck all you old white gits that voted no, the majority has spoken.

[mashman]

Antisemetic cunt. I don'care what YOU think the word means, Jew is a noun and "jew" is an offensive adjective as you use it. It gives a lot of insight into your fetid little world.

It shows that you are incapable of thinking.

[mashman]

Sensible discussion on KB is like two bald men fighting over a comb.
I voted yes.

http://ih1.redbubble.net/image.14542767.3922/papergc,441x415,w,ffffff.2.jpg


so. fuck all you old white gits that voted no, the majority has spoken.

Succinctly put.

Time to change your mindset No voters :shifty:

[Oscar]

It shows that you are incapable of thinking.

Oh dear.
You make up new meanings for words and say I'm not thinking.
You are delusional and quite sad.

[Oscar]

i'm not going to bother explaining it to you again. it's been explained to you, what, ten times now?

i fully back things up before namecalling. it just gives it that extra.... something.

Stupid shit repeated ten times is still stupid shit.
You are falling for the logical fallacy that if something is repeated enough times, by enough people it becomes true. I’ll bet you’re in the anti-1080 and anti-Fluoride nut job brigades as well..

[mashman]

Oh dear.
You make up new meanings for words and say I'm not thinking.
You are delusional and quite sad.

Again, you're not thinking. Others understand what I meant because they thought about it. It looks like you didn't want to think about it. Fair enough. But don't pretend for a moment that I'm gonna class that as thinking.
Oh dear, that was feeble.

[pzkpfw]

Oh dear.
You make up new meanings for words and say I'm not thinking.
You are delusional and quite sad.

Fight the good fight. Mashman blew my irony meter with this stuff.

[Oscar]

Again, you're not thinking. Others understand what I meant because they thought about it. It looks like you didn't want to think about it. Fair enough. But don't pretend for a moment that I'm gonna class that as thinking.
Oh dear, that was feeble.

I'm sure they knew what you meant, as did I.
It still doesn"t make it right.

Next you'll be saying that "nigger" means the urban poor and it's OK when you use it like that.

[mashman]

Fight the good fight. Mashman blew my irony meter with this stuff.

Your meter, your measurement.


I'm sure they knew what you meant, as did I.
It still doesn"t make it right.

Next you'll be saying that "nigger" means the urban poor and it's OK when you use it like that.

Why doesn't it make it right? It's a word that I grew up with, so it was right in another part of the world, fascist.

I never grew up with the word nigger although knew it existed, so it never really occurred to me to call anyone a nigger... even really really black people.

[Akzle]

I'm sure they knew what you meant, as did I.
It still doesn"t make it right.

Next you'll be saying that "nigger" means the urban poor and it's OK when you use it like that.

no. Nigger is also clearly defined. (by samuel jackson no less. And we all know blacks dont lie.)
:"an ignorant motherfucker. Anybody, from any race, can be an ignorant motherfucker"
which is why, mon amis, i call you a crackerjewnigger.

Also, please, tell me the definition of "gay"

[Oscar]

Your meter, your measurement.



Why doesn't it make it right? It's a word that I grew up with, so it was right in another part of the world, fascist.

I never grew up with the word nigger although knew it existed, so it never really occurred to me to call anyone a nigger... even really really black people.

Just because a word was acceptable when you were a child, doesn't make it acceptable now.
Or are you saying that you've not grown up?

[Oscar]

no. Nigger is also clearly defined. (by samuel jackson no less. And we all know blacks dont lie.)
:"an ignorant motherfucker. Anybody, from any race, can be an ignorant motherfucker"
which is why, mon amis, i call you a crackerjewnigger.

Also, please, tell me the definition of "gay"

Mon amis is plural.
You may be the first person here to show your ignorance in two languages:lol:

[mashman]

Just because a word was acceptable when you were a child, doesn't make it acceptable now.
Or are you saying that you've not grown up?

I hadn't used it a very long time and when I did, it was merely to state that I understood that there was another interpretation of the word.
Your offense if your own... I can't start to convey my empathy, my usage of the word has nothing to do with how grown up I am.

[mashman]

Mon amis is plural.
You may be the first person here to show your ignorance in two languages:lol:

https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/5461761280/hC149EB55/

[Akzle]

Mon amis is plural.
You may be the first person here to show your ignorance in two languages:lol:

you didnt answer the question.

[scumdog]

there's 4 more people voting yes than no. that makes a democratic majority.


so. fuck all you old white gits that voted no, the majority has spoken.

Pfft, a majority of 4 stoopid people on a daft biker site forum about a country being able to exist without do-ray-me means jack-shit, a waste of bandwidth and entertainment to discerning people like me!:banana::clap:

[unstuck]

Pfft, a majority of 4 stoopid people on a daft biker site forum about a country being able to exist without do-ray-me means jack-shit, a waste of bandwidth and entertainment to discerning people like me!:banana::clap:

Exactly why I voted don't care. :2thumbsup

[bogan]

Pfft, a majority of 4 stoopid people on a daft biker site forum about a country being able to exist without do-ray-me means jack-shit, a waste of bandwidth and entertainment to discerning people like me!:banana::clap:

I'm firmly with maha on this one (phrasing). Poll options and poll interpretations are bad bad bad (and if an illiterate fuck is wondering I mean bad as in shit, poor, rubbish; not the rainbows and unicorns interpretation).

[pritch]

no, he's not, you fucking moron.

so how 'bout put your big boy pants on and actually respond to points-valide, rather than dismissing every shit with namecalling.

cunt.

Ummm pot, kettle, black?

[Brian d marge]

Pfft, a majority of 4 stoopid people on a daft biker site forum about a country being able to exist without do-ray-me means jack-shit, a waste of bandwidth and entertainment to discerning people like me!:banana::clap:
at least we dont have to uphold stupidity

Sent from my SC-01F using Tapatalk

[BoristheBiter]

Think bigger.

Plenty of incentive, a country full of people, everything will get done.
Good for them... but I doubt the primary motivation was money for some reason.

I have a dream.

A free ride and some money, I bet that WAS the primary motive.
And no, you have a fantasy.




I'm glad there is inaction, in fact I'd argue that that inaction is support for those who are doing something to affect change by applying action, which would mean that they aren't terrorists?... they also likely have work in the morning so that they can feed their families.

Better than the current level of thinking that greets ideas with a balance sheet and a gun.

You would argue with your shadow just to prove a point so your ideas don't hold much weight and i never used the word terrorist.

I don't see any guns on the streets ok NZ so again your point is invalid.


find me a 3 letter summation. i use gew when i think necessary, but in this instance, the question was valid, and was referring to Jewish Jews.

So all that pretense about what you are saying you mean was just bullshit and you are just a bigot.



not that iraq has anything to do with this, but their society has been destroyed by a well funded military and quasi-military occupation over the last decade or so.
kindegartens bombed, hospitals levelled, cluster bombs, and good old bullets and shells. (by the jewSA, incase you're that fucking stupid),
you may not comprehend just what that means for day to day living, you seem to lack any empathy or intelligence whatever,
not everyone wants to fight for existence. certainement, since the jewSA fucked them up, i hold them about 99.3 percent responsible for un-fucking shit up.
"take only photos leave only footprints" or "make the world a better pace as you go" kind of mentality.

are people so stupid that they've forgotten the US has been in iraq for a decade? it doesn't seem to be so widely reported, now that the iraqi's are actually asking for some "freedom" and "defending against terrorists"... weren't these the noble reasons behind the jewSA's crusade?

to quote a wise, though white, git: stupid fucking humans!

Meh the middle east has been fucked since every religion decided that was its holy place well before any crusade.

But yes, stupid fucking humans.

[Akzle]

So all that pretense about what you are saying you mean was just bullshit and you are just a bigot.

Meh the middle east has been fucked since every religion decided that was its holy place well before any crusade.

But yes, stupid fucking humans.

jesus, you did get some, didnt ya.
Ive explained my position. If youre unclear on it. Your problem.

And no. The middle east was going good. Until Jews.

[BoristheBiter]

jesus, you did get some, didnt ya.
Ive explained my position. If youre unclear on it. Your problem.

And no. The middle east was going good. Until Jews.

So you are just a bigot then, at least we know where you stand.


Oh and here is some reading so you actually know what you are talking about.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Middle_East

[Akzle]

So you are just a bigot then, at least we know where you stand.


Oh and here is some reading so you actually know what you are talking about.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Middle_East

i shudder at the thought of the day that wikipedia may be quoted as sauce.

[Akzle]

buut haee. 'eres aught it saais.

"British and French
governments concluded a
secret treaty (the Sykes–Picot Agreement) to partition the Middle East between them
and, additionally, the British
promised via the Balfour Declaration the international Zionist movement their support in creating a Jewish
homeland in Palestine.."

soonds fokken li'git.

[Brian d marge]

Wasnt it the " the one nations" that had no concept of property ownership

The seemed to do quite well until someone wanted the shiny metal rocks


The Celts also seemed to thrive until the Italians wanted the shiny metal rocks


The abbos Also seemed to thrive until someone wanted the shiny metal rocks

Fear and greed that always seems to keep people in-line !

Stephen

[BoristheBiter]

buut haee. 'eres aught it saais.

"British and French
governments concluded a
secret treaty (the Sykes–Picot Agreement) to partition the Middle East between them
and, additionally, the British
promised via the Balfour Declaration the international Zionist movement their support in creating a Jewish
homeland in Palestine.."

soonds fokken li'git.

:killingme:killingme:killingme:killingme:killingme
After you just posted this


i shudder at the thought of the day that wikipedia may be quoted as sauce.

:killingme:killingme:killingme:killingme

You should have also quoted this,

Historically known as the site of the ancient Jewish Kingdom of Israel and successor Jewish nations for 1,200 years between approximately 1100 BC–100 AD.

Like i said, it's been a basket case for century's.

[Akzle]

1,200 years between approximately 1100 BC–100 AD.


roi'ht, an' jus baefur 100ad?, loik, all orv bc an' whaat no't?

Yaera fakken morron an' aa'l

[Akzle]

Wasnt it the " the one nations" that had no concept of property ownership

The seemed to do quite well until someone wanted the shiny metal rocks


The Celts also seemed to thrive until the Italians wanted the shiny metal rocks


The abbos Also seemed to thrive until someone wanted the shiny metal rocks

Fear and greed that always seems to keep people in-line !

Stephen

s'aerly yuu do'n maen th't paep'l, loik, waerk taegeth'r?
Huu's gunnae maek munnae oot ae tha't???

[Voltaire]

i shudder at the thought of the day that wikipedia may be quoted as sauce.

Does Wikipedia sauce taste better than anonymous source?:killingme

[scumdog]

buut haee. 'eres aught it saais.

"British and French
governments concluded a
secret treaty (the Sykes–Picot Agreement) to partition the Middle East between them
and, additionally, the British
promised via the Balfour Declaration the international Zionist movement their support in creating a Jewish
homeland in Palestine.."

soonds fokken li'git.

An' all was beer'n'skittles before that?

Riiiiggghht....

[Akzle]

An' all was beer'n'skittles before that?

Riiiiggghht....

well luv, since you mention it. They did invent beer.

[mashman]

A free ride and some money, I bet that WAS the primary motive.
And no, you have a fantasy.

You would argue with your shadow just to prove a point so your ideas don't hold much weight and i never used the word terrorist.

I don't see any guns on the streets ok NZ so again your point is invalid.


I bet it wasn't.
No, I have a dream... you trying to tell me convince me otherwise is fantasy

No I wouldn't. I never said you used the word terrorist.

So parochial.

[BoristheBiter]

I bet it wasn't.
No, I have a dream... you trying to tell me convince me otherwise is fantasy

tomato, tomato.




So parochial.

Don't be so hard on yourself, your narrow view of things is whats make you who you are.:clap:

[mashman]

tomato, tomato.

Don't be so hard on yourself, your narrow view of things is whats make you who you are.:clap:

Not really, but your choice.

:killingme@narrow. I'm not saying that I've explored every single avenue of every single subject related to man since forever, I've explored a few and settled on what I believe would best suit the majority. And since when is making a choice nothing more than a narrow view of a thing? I love ironing.

[Brian d marge]

Does Wikipedia sauce taste better than anonymous source?:killingme

I prefer happy shopper meself , 22p a bottle


http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/4120Ceytt4L._SY300_.jpg

Stephen

Sharing ...its the new black