Stupid World

[Ocean1]

Sigh. In situations where every little helps, it could make a difference. As energy inefficient as it may well be, it could make a difference.

Yes. It would waste energy that could otherwise help 10 times as many people.

[mashman]

Money is not a resource, idiot.

Yes it does, suggesting electrolysing water to make hydrogen to make water beats the fuck out of it.

... when what they really need to make fresh water is a camp fire and a pot.

The great god wiki says it is (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource) as does the Oxford English dictionary (http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/resource?q=resource).

:yawn:

coz wood will be freely available in a disaster area eh... especially with 10's of thousands of people all looking to do the same.

[mashman]

Yes. It would waste energy that could otherwise help 10 times as many people.

So I keep hearing. So why isn't that happening in Haiti? Bet those dying of cholera would be happy to put in the effort to produce the power required to split the water is that's all they had available to them. Obviously you'd rather sit and die.

[Ocean1]

Are you saying that the title of the graph is incorrect? as there is no mention of the associated costs having been taken into account. I would assume one of the main reasons for the drop in "efficiency" is that the oil being harder to find and get at?

Fair enough.

In fact the article does discuss changes in the depth of attributed investment costs. It doesn't mention anything at all about cost increases associated with the scarcity or otherwise of the product. So I'm going with the former as at least a part of the explanation for the scarcely believable increase in investment costs from 1% to 30%

[Ocean1]

The great god wiki says it is (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource) as does the Oxford English dictionary (http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/resource?q=resource).

Yes, CAPITAL as a resource, as REPRESENTED by money. The money for any given budget isn't plucked from a fairies arse as you keep insisting, it represents value generated by someone. Y'know, earned.


coz wood will be freely available in a disaster area eh... especially with 10's of thousands of people all looking to do the same.

I believe a fair wack of forest was in fact destroyed in that disaster, yes. That'd suggest a fair bit of firewood should be fairly readily available, no? In any case the cheapest effective method of producing heat would seem to be the best approach, yes?

[bogan]

So I keep hearing. So why isn't that happening in Haiti? Bet those dying of cholera would be happy to put in the effort to produce the power required to split the water is that's all they had available to them. Obviously you'd rather sit and die.

Bet they would.

Bet the rest of the world would also think you're an arsehole if you gave them a machine that could only save one in ten instead of a machine that could save all ten though.

[Ocean1]

So I keep hearing. So why isn't that happening in Haiti?

I'd say that's because they weren't clever enough to become something more advanced than a stone aged society completely unable to take advantage of the possibilities offered by the 20th century let alone one capable of responding to any sort of disaster.


Bet those dying of cholera would be happy to put in the effort to produce the power required to split the water is that's all they had available to them.

But it's not all that's available to them. In fact a massively inefficient water maker is probably one of the very last things they'd want.


Obviously you'd rather sit and die.

Nope. I'd rather use whatever I had at hand to survive, and that's exactly what would happen.

[mashman]

In fact the article does discuss changes in the depth of attributed investment costs. It doesn't mention anything at all about cost increases associated with the scarcity or otherwise of the product. So I'm going with the former as at least a part of the explanation for the scarcely believable increase in investment costs from 1% to 30%

Which linky did you follow?


Yes, CAPITAL as a resource, as REPRESENTED by money. The money for any given budget isn't plucked from a fairies arse as you keep insisting, it represents value generated by someone. Y'know, earned.

I believe a fair wack of forest was in fact destroyed in that disaster, yes. That'd suggest a fair bit of firewood should be fairly readily available, no? In any case the cheapest effective method of producing heat would seem to be the best approach, yes?

The money when it is created is plucked out of thin air. There may well be an asset that its creation can be valued against, but given that you end up paying back approx x times the value of a house or $x of interest, those x's are plucked out of thin air and created as debt. That debt has to go somewhere and it usually goes towards creating more money x times over i.e. plucked out of thin air time x. Believe what you will, but it is an infinite resource.

I wonder how much the wood costs? I wonder how long it will last? And yes, as I have stated repeatedly, the cheapest effective method would be the best... and from my perspective given that they're "cleaning" water to drink/survive, I care not how efficient the method is. Get it yet?

[mashman]

Bet they would.

Bet the rest of the world would also think you're an arsehole if you gave them a machine that could only save one in ten instead of a machine that could save all ten though.

ha ha ha ha ha ha haaaaaaa... I'm sure they wouldn't if noone had given them anything else to use :D.

[blue rider]

http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/06/11/ration-consumption-or-ration-production/

an interesting read, again :yawn:

[mashman]

I'd say that's because they weren't clever enough to become something more advanced than a stone aged society completely unable to take advantage of the possibilities offered by the 20th century let alone one capable of responding to any sort of disaster.

But it's not all that's available to them. In fact a massively inefficient water maker is probably one of the very last things they'd want.

Nope. I'd rather use whatever I had at hand to survive, and that's exactly what would happen.

Bit harsh given that all they need is investment. I guess they don't have anything that anyone else wants and therefore are nothing more than a stone aged society because of the lack of available to them.

I'm sure the people that are dying of cholera might see things differently.

Good for you.

[blue rider]

.........

I believe a fair wack of forest was in fact destroyed in that disaster, yes. That'd suggest a fair bit of firewood should be fairly readily available, no? In any case the cheapest effective method of producing heat would seem to be the best approach, yes?


actually deforestation in Haiti is a big problem and has been so for some time....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deforestation_in_Haiti


continue

[Ocean1]

Which linky did you follow?

The one you plucked the graph from:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_returned_on_energy_invested


How deep should the probing in the supply chain of the tools being used to generate energy go? For example, if steel is being used to drill for oil or construct a nuclear power plant, should the energy input of the steel be taken into account, should the energy input into building the factory being used to construct the steel be taken into account and amortized? Should the energy input of the roads which are used to ferry the goods be taken into account? What about the energy used to cook the steelworker's breakfasts? These are complex questions evading simple answers. A full accounting would require considerations of opportunity costs and comparing total energy expenditures in the presence and absence of this economic activity.



The money when it is created is plucked out of thin air. There may well be an asset that its creation can be valued against, but given that you end up paying back approx x times the value of a house or $x of interest, those x's are plucked out of thin air and created as debt. That debt has to go somewhere and it usually goes towards creating more money x times over i.e. plucked out of thin air time x. Believe what you will, but it is an infinite resource.

Nope. It's as finite as the assets it represents. If it isn't money representing the value of an existing asset or the part of an asset represented by borrowed money then it doesn't get pulled from anywhere. You're no better at that shit than you are at inventing watermakers, I'd find something else to become an expert in if you don't want to look any more silly than you already do.



I wonder how much the wood costs? I wonder how long it will last? And yes, as I have stated repeatedly, the cheapest effective method would be the best... and from my perspective given that they're "cleaning" water to drink/survive, I care not how efficient the method is. Get it yet?

Why would you assume it costs anything? Seeing as how the only people wanting it can't pay for it I'd be surprised if there was any market for it at all. As for how long it'll last I have no idea, I'd say a bigger problem would be teaching them they have to use it. And how.

And yes, I get it, you don't care how effective or practical your ideas are, you're still right.

[mashman]

http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/06/11/ration-consumption-or-ration-production/

an interesting read, again :yawn:

but but but but but but human nature denies that those sorts of things can take place, even though they did take place, the really can't take place <_<.

Good read muchos grassy arse.

[Ocean1]

actually deforestation in Haiti is a big problem and has been so for some time....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deforestation_in_Haiti


continue

Yes, but if easy money is a good enough reason to destroy your forests then I'm pretty sure it's OK to burn enough of it to boil water until you can develop a better plan, no?

[Ocean1]

Bit harsh given that all they need is investment.

Correct. Like everyone else they need to invest in their own future, because nobody else can do it for them.

[mashman]

The one you plucked the graph from:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_returned_on_energy_invested

Will give that a read a little later.



Nope. It's as finite as the assets it represents. If it isn't money representing the value of an existing asset or the part of an asset represented by borrowed money then it doesn't get pulled from anywhere. You're no better at that shit than you are at inventing watermakers, I'd find something else to become an expert in if you don't want to look any more silly than you already do.

Fuck off. QE, must buy bonds, oh where do you get the bonds from, oh the govt creates them (out of thin air) with the promise to pay a higher rate than they're actually worth at the time of issue :facepalm:. I'm not looking to be an expert, but I can accept money for what it really is and it's anything but the definition you give to it these days... which is just plain naive.



Why would you assume it costs anything? Seeing as how the only people wanting it can't pay for it I'd be surprised if there was any market for it at all. As for how long it'll last I have no idea, I'd say a bigger problem would be teaching them they have to use it. And how.

And yes, I get it, you don't care how effective or practical your ideas are, you're still right.

Given that they've survived so far, I'm guessing they're using it. Tis a shame that they need to pay for anything given the shit they're in. Yet another moronic rule of the free market economy.

It ain't a case of being right, so no, you don't get it.

[mashman]

Correct. Like everyone else they need to invest in their own future, because nobody else can do it for them.

Do you mean print their own money?

[bogan]

ha ha ha ha ha ha haaaaaaa... I'm sure they wouldn't if noone had given them anything else to use :D.

Its a bit like giving out free vaccine, but filling half of them with just water. Helpful to some, but you're still an arsehole for halfassing it.

[Ocean1]

Fuck off. QE, must buy bonds, oh where do you get the bonds from, oh the govt creates them (out of thin air) with the promise to pay a higher rate than they're actually worth at the time of issue :facepalm:. I'm not looking to be an expert, but I can accept money for what it really is and it's anything but the definition you give to it these days... which is just plain naive.

So, bonds is the way government borrows money to pay for shit, yes? So there's actual assets connected with the money, yes? Can you tell me what percentage of the money currently in circulation in the economy doesn't represent assets?


Given that they've survived so far, I'm guessing they're using it. Tis a shame that they need to pay for anything given the shit they're in. Yet another moronic rule of the free market economy.

So they've got fuel and they're surviving, so what's all the bullshit about?

And they don't have any money, so they're obviously not paying for anything.

And a free market is the only possible sort, anything else isn't a market, fool.


It ain't a case of being right, so no, you don't get it.

But it is a case of being right. And you're not. So stop pretending that you've got all the answers for problems you actually know fuck all about.

[mashman]

Its a bit like giving out free vaccine, but filling half of them with just water. Helpful to some, but you're still an arsehole for halfassing it.

Cheeky fuckknuckle... I care not how accurate your statement is (even if your example is shit) you almost made me cry.

[mashman]

So, bonds is the way government borrows money to pay for shit, yes? So there's actual assets connected with the money, yes? Can you tell me what percentage of the money currently in circulation in the economy doesn't represent assets?

Where does the asset (bond) come from? I can't tell you how much represents the value of the assets on the planet. But given that they can manipulate the price of anything they wish too, including the value of the debt, I see that as a moot question. ALL money is debt because it carries interest and is created from the promise of even more debt.



So they've got fuel and they're surviving, so what's all the bullshit about?

And they don't have any money, so they're obviously not paying for anything.

And a free market is the only possible sort, anything else isn't a market, fool.

Dunno, some folk decided that I was talking about something entirely different... although I did learn some stuff and did extra reading too.

Yes but the stuff they could do with costs money that they don't have even though the could really do with it.

But it ain't free.



But it is a case of being right. And you're not. So stop pretending that you've got all the answers for problems you actually know fuck all about.

Not for me it isn't. And I certainly shan't honour that request.

[gwigs]

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1333998/?ref_=sr_1
A good watch for people interested in what is going on ....
100 mpg in 1947...

[gwigs]

http://fuel-efficient-vehicles.org/energy-news/?page_id=787
This guy....They killed him...

[Scuba_Steve]

http://fuel-efficient-vehicles.org/energy-news/?page_id=787
This guy....They killed him...

Well patent exists... (http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=4,177,779.PN.&OS=PN/4,177,779&RS=PN/4,177,779)I'll leave someone more technical/enthusiastic than I to read through it

[gwigs]

Well patent exists... (http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=4,177,779.PN.&OS=PN/4,177,779&RS=PN/4,177,779)I'll leave someone more technical/enthusiastic than I to read through it

I,m too thick to understand all of that but not dumb enough to question it ...

[oneofsix]

I,m too thick to understand all of that but not dumb enough to question it ...

Think I must be dumber then cause I can't see why you would


“I was messing around with a gasoline lawn mower when I accidentally knocked a hole in its fuel tank. I put a vacuum line running from the tanks straight into the carburetor inlet.”

So there is a hole in the gas tank, what has that to do with the vacuum tubes and how would connecting them to the carburettor inlet fix a hole in the gas tank?

[Oscar]

Well patent exists... (http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=4,177,779.PN.&OS=PN/4,177,779&RS=PN/4,177,779)I'll leave someone more technical/enthusiastic than I to read through it

Just because there's a patent doesn't mean it works:brick:

Here's a list of patents issued by the US Patent Office:


1. Apparatus for facilitating the birth of a child by centrifugal force.

2. Method of stopping a stolen car without a high-speed chase, utilizing a bar code.

3. Electrified table cloth.

4. Non-lethal cock fighting system.

5. Subliminal Glasses.

[bogan]

Just because there's a patent doesn't mean it works:brick:

Here's a list of patents issued by the US Patent Office:


1. Apparatus for facilitating the birth of a child by centrifugal force.

2. Method of stopping a stolen car without a high-speed chase, utilizing a bar code.

3. Electrified table cloth.

4. Non-lethal cock fighting system.

5. Subliminal Glasses.

I'll just go out on a limb and say it was a male who thought of the first one?

[Oscar]

I'll just go out on a limb and say it was a male who thought of the first one?

You could be right...

[Scuba_Steve]

Just because there's a patent doesn't mean it works:brick:


And I never made any such claim; maybee your comprehension needs some work?. But being that there is a patent, how it "works" is spelt out. Therefore anyone that way minded can establish if said design would work & even replicate it themselves should they feel the need.

[Banditbandit]

Well patent exists... (http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=4,177,779.PN.&OS=PN/4,177,779&RS=PN/4,177,779)I'll leave someone more technical/enthusiastic than I to read through it

Yeah .. I get it ... however it relies on "fuel vapors" ... and what are they? Certainly not water ...

This replaces the current carb or injection system whch takes liquid fuel and pumps it - in a measured quantity - into the piston where it is vaporised by heat - then exploded by the spark ..

The question for me is: What kind of vapor? petrol vapor? Hydrogen vapor?

[unstuck]

You could be right...

WTF. Bullshit, that cannot be a serious invention, SURELY not.:gob::oi-grr:

[Oscar]

And I never made any such claim; maybee your comprehension needs some work?. But being that there is a patent, how it "works" is spelt out. Therefore anyone that way minded can establish if said design would work & even replicate it themselves should they feel the need.


Lighten up, Francis.
My comprehension is fine - I didn't say you made any claim (so go and unknot your panties).
You say there's a patent, but you can't be arsed actually reading it.
I was merely making the comment that just because there's a patent doesn't mean it works (as I couldn't be arsed reading it, either).

[mashman]

Just because there's a patent doesn't mean it works:brick:

What a fuckin dickhead :killingme... dance some more jester.

[Oscar]

WTF. Bullshit, that cannot be a serious invention, SURELY not.:gob::oi-grr:

Who knows?
Was it built?
I doubt it, but someone submitted the blueprints to the USPO.

[Oscar]

What a fuckin dickhead :killingme... dance some more jester.

Oh no, more cutting wit from the Master....how will I cope?


















































What a maroon...

[mashman]

Oh no, more cutting wit from the Master....how will I cope?

What a maroon...

It's ok, Mr beige. I realise no damage will have been done.

[unstuck]

Well i,ll be fucked.:gob::eek5:

http://www.geekologie.com/2011/02/giving_birth_as_terrifying_car.php

[blue rider]

http://techliberty.org.nz/gcsbs-new-powers-for-wide-spread-spying-on-new-zealanders/

yea...what eva

[mashman]

http://techliberty.org.nz/gcsbs-new-powers-for-wide-spread-spying-on-new-zealanders/

yea...what eva

It's a bad joke really. Swallowed by a weak public full of fear and needing to be looked after. So many strong people with such a weak will. So ya get what ya vote for. I wonder if we'll get a referendum on the idea :blink:

I wonder what fantastic laws will follow. No foul language online. Breaking the Decency and Decorum Act will fill them jails right up.

[Genestho]

It's a bad joke really. Swallowed by a weak public full of fear and needing to be looked after. So many strong people with such a weak will. So ya get what ya vote for. I wonder if we'll get a referendum on the idea :blink:
Bollocks, ya get what ya bend over for. How many of these whingers have bothered to get involved in the transparent democratic process we have in this country?
It amazes me that people always seem to have enough time to blog but, I bet not ONE has made submissions on the Bill or asked to appear before the select committee, hell you can even "appear" over the phone - they'll even call YOU.

"We think these laws need to be stopped" How? By writing a flippin blog?

Here, I'll do something not one blogger has bothered to do.. Link (http://www.parliament.nz/en-NZ/PB/Legislation/Bills/f/b/f/00DBHOH_BILL12122_1-Government-Communications-Security-Bureau-and.htm)

Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill

The bill is an omnibus bill that proposes amendments to the Government Communications Security Bureau Act 2003, the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security Act 1996, and the Intelligence and Security Committee Act 1996. The purposes of the bill are to make clear the statutory framework governing the activities of the GCSB and to enhance the external mechanisms for the oversight of the New Zealand's intelligence agencies. The Intelligence and Security Committee is inviting submissions on the bill.

The closing date for submissions is Thursday, 13 June 2013. A copy of the bill and the regulatory impact statement can be accessed from the downloads panel on this page.

Submissions can be emailed to GCSB.Bill@parliament.govt.nz. If you wish to appear before the committee, state this clearly and provide a name, daytime phone number, and email address. Submissions will generally be made public. The committee is required to report to the House on this bill by 26 July 2013.

[blue rider]

another laugh

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-06-11/traders-said-to-rig-currency-rates-to-profit-off-clients.html


and some of us do a bit more than just hang out on internet forums....some of us do write letters...not that anyone would read them, but you know at least its done.
lol

[mashman]

Bollocks, ya get what ya bend over for. How many of these whingers have bothered to get involved in the transparent democratic process we have in this country?
It amazes me that people always seem to have enough time to blog but, I bet not ONE has made submissions on the Bill or asked to appear before the select committee, hell you can even "appear" over the phone - they'll even call YOU.

"We think these laws need to be stopped" How? By writing a flippin blog?

Here, I'll do something not one blogger has bothered to do.. Link (http://www.parliament.nz/en-NZ/PB/Legislation/Bills/f/b/f/00DBHOH_BILL12122_1-Government-Communications-Security-Bureau-and.htm)

Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill

The bill is an omnibus bill that proposes amendments to the Government Communications Security Bureau Act 2003, the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security Act 1996, and the Intelligence and Security Committee Act 1996. The purposes of the bill are to make clear the statutory framework governing the activities of the GCSB and to enhance the external mechanisms for the oversight of the New Zealand's intelligence agencies. The Intelligence and Security Committee is inviting submissions on the bill.

The closing date for submissions is Thursday, 13 June 2013. A copy of the bill and the regulatory impact statement can be accessed from the downloads panel on this page.

Submissions can be emailed to GCSB.Bill@parliament.govt.nz. If you wish to appear before the committee, state this clearly and provide a name, daytime phone number, and email address. Submissions will generally be made public. The committee is required to report to the House on this bill by 26 July 2013.

I'm not a lawyer and refuse to wade through that garbage given that it's going in whether you like it or not (even if the entire country wrote objections). Nor am I interested in writing to politicians when it won't make a blind bit of difference (I've done it a few times before).

However I'm more than aware of what I would use these powers for and laugh, oh do I laugh, at what's in the post. Should I get off my arse and do something about it, it won't be to write a letter to appease my conscience. Until that time, I hope you enjoy the irony of my apathy.

[Genestho]

I'm not a lawyer and refuse to wade through that garbage given that it's going in whether you like it or not (even if the entire country wrote objections). Nor am I interested in writing to politicians when it won't make a blind bit of difference (I've done it a few times before).

However I'm more than aware of what I would use these powers for and laugh, oh do I laugh, at what's in the post. Should I get off my arse and do something about it, it won't be to write a letter to appease my conscience. Until that time, I hope you enjoy the irony of my apathy.
Writing politicians a wee letter is very different to actually submitting on current Bills and actually appearing.

If people bothered to make a submission (no you don't need to be a lawyer) and were in numbers at select committees it's fairly hard to ignore, it would hold up Parliament by using their own [EDIT: transparent and legal (if behaved)] process and I'd think quite newsworthy.

However yes, the Irony is as always - strong. :facepalm: As you were. :yawn:

[mashman]

Writing politicians a wee letter is very different to actually submitting on current Bills and actually appearing.

If people bothered to make a submission (no you don't need to be a lawyer) and were in numbers at select committees it's fairly hard to ignore, it would hold up Parliament by using their own process and I'd think quite newsworthy.

However yes, the Irony is as always - strong. :facepalm: As you were. :yawn:

I'm sure it is and you may well be equipped and prepared to do that sort of thing, many people aren't, including me.

You need to be able to understand what you're reading to make a submission right? Nice idea. Why hasn't there been a campaign as your post is the first I've seen that they're accepting submissions around citizens concerns. It may well be newsworthy, but given that it was allowed to take place allegedly illegally, and in conjunction with govts ignoring the rules and their people across the globe, it'll go through irrespective of how compelling the submissions will be, because it is a global policy. Every single act of fear-mongering that takes place around the world cements ignorant attitudes towards the issue makes this legislation an absolute imperative to have in order to protect, erm, yeah let's say it's being enacted to protect the people (which is utter bullshit). If I were a tin foil hatter, I'd say that the NZ govt was being told, sorry, advised to implement the legislation in order to safeguard its economy from, hmmmmmmm, well you make your mind up, how hard would it be to turn NZ into a 3rd world country given the reliance on exports? Of course that'll be viewed as tin foil hat, but it's what I would do should the representatives of a country decide that they didn't want to open up their server to those who want them. blah blah blah ad infinitum... and the only way they can achieve it is by using the financial system. No financial system, no power.

Glad to oblige a lady.

[blue rider]

lol

cats to rule the world or at least a city in mexico


http://abcnews.go.com/ABC_Univision/News/cat-runs-mayor-beleaguered-mexican-town/story?id=19351488#.UbdOu0Q3Qy4

https://www.facebook.com/elcandigatomorris

http://www.elcandigato.com/

http://www.juancarlosvazquez.com/portfolio/morris-the-cat-social-satiric-posters/


go morris!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mcUza_wWCfA

[Oscar]

I'm not a lawyer and refuse to wade through that garbage given that it's going in whether you like it or not (even if the entire country wrote objections). Nor am I interested in writing to politicians when it won't make a blind bit of difference (I've done it a few times before).

However I'm more than aware of what I would use these powers for and laugh, oh do I laugh, at what's in the post. Should I get off my arse and do something about it, it won't be to write a letter to appease my conscience. Until that time, I hope you enjoy the irony of my apathy.

That's not gonna stop you making uniformed pronouncements here though, is it?

[blue rider]

baked today.......frozen in Ireland, really fresh bread in OZ

http://www.smh.com.au/business/coles-baked-today-bread-made-in-ireland-court-told-20130612-2o3ye.html


:eek5:

[mashman]

That's not gonna stop you making uniformed pronouncements here though, is it?

Take from it what you will.

[oneofsix]

baked today.......frozen in Ireland, really fresh bread in OZ

http://www.smh.com.au/business/coles-baked-today-bread-made-in-ireland-court-told-20130612-2o3ye.html


:eek5:

Wonder how they would feel about frozen dough, the dough isn't baked before it is frozen. Must be OK or Subway would be in trouble. :shutup:

[mashman]

The fuckin bludger bastards are such rip-off cunts (http://nz.finance.yahoo.com/news/updated-david-ross-remanded-bail-010100992.html)... and for every one that does get caught there are hundreds of them out there that don't. Bludgers. He shoulda given his shareholders more of a cut so that they wouldn't insist on an audit.

[Oscar]

The fuckin bludger bastards are such rip-off cunts (http://nz.finance.yahoo.com/news/updated-david-ross-remanded-bail-010100992.html)... and for every one that does get caught there are hundreds of them out there that don't. Bludgers. He shoulda given his shareholders more of a cut so that they wouldn't insist on an audit.

There are hundreds of $400m Ponzi schemes out there?

You are such a wally...

[mashman]

There are hundreds of $400m Ponzi schemes out there?

You are such a wally...

And you know there aren't because? there have been a few $billion ponzi's exposed in the US and I believe that there are hundreds if not thousands (can't remember the number from an article I read a month or two ago) multi million $ ponzi naughty boys languishing in US jails as we speak. Or are you saying that because they haven't been caught yet that ponzi schemes don't exist?

And here's a little list. Notice how the number grows across the centuries. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ponzi_schemes). Did you know that the financial system is nothing more than a ponzi scheme?

Dickhead.

[Ocean1]

Did you know that the financial system is nothing more than a ponzi scheme?

Well you sure as fuck don't. By your own admission you not only know fuck all about it but you can't be fucked finding out. So 'scuse me if I take your opinion with the grain of salt it's worth.

Moron.

[mashman]

Well you sure as fuck don't. By your own admission you not only know fuck all about it but you can't be fucked finding out. So 'scuse me if I take your opinion with the grain of salt it's worth.

Moron.

:killingme... A fraudulent investing scam promising high rates of return with little risk to investors (same as a bank, except it's legal). The Ponzi scheme generates returns for older investors by acquiring new investors (just like a banl as according to you new money comes from new investors). This scam actually yields the promised returns to earlier investors (the earlier you will have started the more your principle will have grown), as long as there are more new investors. These schemes usually collapse on themselves when the new investments stop (why has the financial system, failed? did someone mention lack of investment?).

Naive cretin.

[Ocean1]

:killingme... A fraudulent investing scam promising high rates of return with little risk to investors (same as a bank, except it's legal). The Ponzi scheme generates returns for older investors by acquiring new investors (just like a banl as according to you new money comes from new investors). This scam actually yields the promised returns to earlier investors (the earlier you will have started the more your principle will have grown), as long as there are more new investors. These schemes usually collapse on themselves when the new investments stop (why has the financial system, failed? did someone mention lack of investment?).

Naive cretin.

So, a Ponzi scheme is about as similar to a functional economy as you are to a financial expert then.

Not the slightest resemblance.

[oneofsix]

That sounds a bit like what the person running a ponzi scheme would say about how their scheme was a legit investment. :nya:

[Ocean1]

That sounds a bit like what the person running a ponzi scheme would say about how their scheme was a legit investment. :nya:

It does, eh?

Even so, through an unbelievable run of absolutely stunning luck I've managed to avoid falling foul of any of the thousands of Ponzi scheme exponents loitering all over the fiscal landscape.

God alone knows how anyone else manages to survive the septic death trap that is the modern economy. We're all doomed, doooooooommed I say.

[Oscar]

And you know there aren't because? there have been a few $billion ponzi's exposed in the US and I believe that there are hundreds if not thousands (can't remember the number from an article I read a month or two ago) multi million $ ponzi naughty boys languishing in US jails as we speak. Or are you saying that because they haven't been caught yet that ponzi schemes don't exist?

And here's a little list. Notice how the number grows across the centuries. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ponzi_schemes). Did you know that the financial system is nothing more than a ponzi scheme?

Dickhead.

You are such a wally.
You said "hundreds".
There isn't even 100 in the last 10 years on that worldwide list.

As for you comment about the financial system being a ponzi scheme, you haven't got a clue, have you?

[mashman]

You are such a wally.
You said "hundreds".
There isn't even 100 in the last 10 years on that worldwide list.

As for you comment about the financial system being a ponzi scheme, you haven't got a clue, have you?

:rofl: I take it you looked for yourself? No? Let me give you a helping hand. Bare in mind this is from 1 country. (http://www.sec.gov/spotlight/enf-actions-ponzi.shtml).

It operates on exactly the same principles.

[Ocean1]

:rofl: I take it you looked for yourself? No? Let me give you a helping hand. Bare in mind this is from 1 country. (http://www.sec.gov/spotlight/enf-actions-ponzi.shtml).

So, one shyster per 3,000,000 Americans.

That's a stunning level of honesty from the country that invented the Ponzi scheme.

Especially given the number of gullible and greedy residents.


It operates on exactly the same principles.

But you don't know that. And you can't be fucked learning anything about how economies actually work. Which makes your opinion worth precisely nothing.

Now fuck off you silly, ignorant little ingrate.

[oneofsix]

Even so, through an unbelievable run of absolutely stunning luck I've managed to avoid falling foul of any of the thousands of Ponzi scheme exponents loitering all over the fiscal landscape.
Really? because you often sound like the seller but then again you could just be the ultimate victim



God alone knows how anyone else manages to survive the septic death trap that is the modern economy. We're all doomed, doooooooommed I say.

Well at least you got that bit right even though your reasoning might be a bit suspect.

BTW the American's didn't invent the Ponzi scheme, they just gave it that silly name.

[Ocean1]

Really? because you often sound like the seller but then again you could just be the ultimate victim.

Yeah? When was the last time I offered to sell anyone something?


Well at least you got that bit right even though your reasoning might be a bit suspect.

It was an obvious pisstake.

Who's sounding like the ultimate loser, now?

[mashman]

So, one shyster per 3,000,000 Americans.

That's a stunning level of honesty from the country that invented the Ponzi scheme.

Especially given the number of gullible and greedy residents.

Well if they were all at it noone would be working for a living and paying for your free lunches. It's only possible because of money ya know... and think of all the shit that people have to go through to bail these fuckers out, the services that get cut, the jobs that are lost, and the knock on effects of those services being cut, jobs that are lost, not to mention who gets stuck with the bill. I guess you empathise with them. Oh and just to make that clear, I wasn't talking about empathising with the 3 million per shyster that get the shaft.



But you don't know that. And you can't be fucked learning anything about how economies actually work. Which makes your opinion worth precisely nothing.

Now fuck off you silly, ignorant little ingrate.

Of course I know that, it's easy. You find a list of characteristics that make up a ponzi scheme, then you find a list of characteristics that make up a financial economy and finally you perform a very simple analysis. Even silly, ignorant little ingrates like me can figure these things out. I'll spare my need to retort in kind on this occasion, as I feel like I should empathise with your situation having once been that fuckin dumb.

[Oscar]

:rofl: I take it you looked for yourself? No? Let me give you a helping hand. Bare in mind this is from 1 country. (http://www.sec.gov/spotlight/enf-actions-ponzi.shtml).

It operates on exactly the same principles.

If you believe that the international finance system equates to a ponzi scheme you are a complete moron.

[mashman]

If you believe that the international finance system equates to a ponzi scheme you are a complete moron.

Did you make your ponzi characteristics list and see if those characteristics are reflected in the financial system, or is that too scary for you? Coz until you do, you're more of an uniformed idiot than I am, in fact taking such things on faith makes you a zealot... which would mean that every single "anti" post you post is really just you projecting. Which would make a huge amount of sense given your greater intelligence and intellect, yet inability to want to find things out for yourself because you read it in a book.

[oneofsix]

Yeah? When was the last time I offered to sell anyone something?



It was an obvious pisstake.

Who's sounding like the ultimate loser, now?

interesting, you equate victim with loser. :wacko: Often the victimiser is the loser in a moral or social sense and the victim is just that. The victim of a bully is the victim but the bully is the loser, same with theft and Ponzi schemes.

You are nothing but a wind bag full of insults. When you can't argue back you resort to personal insults, now that is a loser, whilst Mashy and I (no I don't totally agree with Mashy but he has more dignity) might be the victims of your insults you are the loser.

[Ocean1]

interesting, you equate victim with loser.

Isn’t that pretty much what defines a victim? In my experience victims lose money/assets/skin to those that exploit them.


Often the victimiser is the loser in a moral or social sense and the victim is just that. The victim of a bully is the victim but the bully is the loser, same with theft and Ponzi schemes.

Nah, real victims don’t give a fuck why bullies behave that way, it doesn’t make the slightest difference to the victim. And far more often the victimiser or bully is simply an arsehole with no excuse whatsoever, moral or otherwise. Apart from that you're correct, bullies, thieves and fraudsters are all arseholes.

But none of them threaten the world economy.


You are nothing but a wind bag full of insults. When you can't argue back you resort to personal insults, now that is a loser, whilst Mashy and I (no I don't totally agree with Mashy but he has more dignity) might be the victims of your insults you are the loser.

He started it.

Now, have you got an actual point to make regarding ponzi schemes and the fools that throw their money at them or are you all wind?

Piss or get off the pot.

[mashman]

"If you occasionally buy this product, please kindly resend this letter to the World Human Right Organization. Thousands people here who are under the persecution of the Chinese Communist Party Government will thank and remember you forever" (http://nz.finance.yahoo.com/news/chinese-factory-worker-wrote-chilling-201800033.html)

All for the love of money.

[bogan]

"If you occasionally buy this product, please kindly resend this letter to the World Human Right Organization. Thousands people here who are under the persecution of the Chinese Communist Party Government will thank and remember you forever" (http://nz.finance.yahoo.com/news/chinese-factory-worker-wrote-chilling-201800033.html)

All for the love of money.

Obviously slave labor sucks. But, I'm not sure a Communist Party Government run slave labor factory is the best example of capitalism's abuse of money. In fact I'd say it speaks more to the opposite...

[mashman]

Obviously slave labor sucks. But, I'm not sure a Communist Party Government run slave labor factory is the best example of capitalism's abuse of money. In fact I'd say it speaks more to the opposite...

So they don't sell the stuff that these workers have worked so hard to produce? If the stuff didn't need to be made, yes, they wouldn't get paid, but neither would they have to work under such conditions. Given that the Walton family have at least 4 family members in the top 20 of richest people in the world, you'd think that they would maybe up the wages a bit and take their foot of the throats, I mean gas, yes foot off the gas? Aye, nothing to do with capitalisms abuse of money in the slightest.

[bogan]

So they don't sell the stuff that these workers have worked so hard to produce? If the stuff didn't need to be made, yes, they wouldn't get paid, but neither would they have to work under such conditions. Given that the Walton family have at least 4 family members in the top 20 of richest people in the world, you'd think that they would maybe up the wages a bit and take their foot of the throats, I mean gas, yes foot off the gas? Aye, nothing to do with capitalisms abuse of money in the slightest.

The point is, it's the greed of those in power the creates the slave labor. Power abusers will always find a way to exploit those they can get away with. But it seems comparing communist china to capitalist america, it's the capitalist approach that has less serious abuse.

[mashman]

The point is, it's the greed of those in power the creates the slave labor. Power abusers will always find a way to exploit those they can get away with. But it seems comparing communist china to capitalist america, it's the capitalist approach that has less serious abuse.

Fair point... but you have to accept that the only reason the people are working there in the first place is to earn money. If people had access to the resources they need to survive for free, would they work in such conditions? Would "enforcers" still, erm, enforce if they weren't getting paid to do so? I wonder how much more than the employees the "enforcers", I mean management, I mean "enforcers" are getting paid? I wasn't trying to compare the two, but irrespective of whether a society is a democracy, socialism, communism, tyranny etc... they're all capitalistic. Governance merely decides the minimum wage :D

[bogan]

Fair point... but you have to accept that the only reason the people are working there in the first place is to earn money. If people had access to the resources they need to survive for free, would they work in such conditions? Would "enforcers" still, erm, enforce if they weren't getting paid to do so? I wonder how much more than the employees the "enforcers", I mean management, I mean "enforcers" are getting paid? I wasn't trying to compare the two, but irrespective of whether a society is a democracy, socialism, communism, tyranny etc... they're all capitalistic. Governance merely decides the minimum wage :D

Nope. They are there being exploited to support the upper class. Money is merely the medium of exchange, were money simply removed another medium would replace it, as it has been in the past.

[mashman]

Nope. They are there being exploited to support the upper class. Money is merely the medium of exchange, were money simply removed another medium would replace it, as it has been in the past.

If that was the case, they're not being exploited. Money is being used as a weapon. If you don't do as I tell you, I will not give you money.

[bogan]

If that was the case, they're not being exploited. Money is being used as a weapon. If you don't do as I tell you, I will not give you money.

Um, no that's still being exploited; the upper class is using them for its own advantage. Also, that article said they were using physical violence as the weapon, not money.

[Banditbandit]

Obviously slave labor sucks. But, I'm not sure a Communist Party Government run slave labor factory is the best example of capitalism's abuse of money. In fact I'd say it speaks more to the opposite...

I doubt that I would call the Chinese Government "Communist" .. they show little sign of withering away to leave the dictatorship of the proletariat ..

They are not Communist for al the reasons you have given mashie ... a communist Government would never exploit the workers ..

[mashman]

Um, no that's still being exploited; the upper class is using them for its own advantage. Also, that article said they were using physical violence as the weapon, not money.

What do the upper class get out of the exploitation? Why is the physical violence being administered? And why do the "workers" stay if they are suffering physical violence?


I doubt that I would call the Chinese Government "Communist" .. they show little sign of withering away to leave the dictatorship of the proletariat ..

They are not Communist for al the reasons you have given mashie ... a communist Government would never exploit the workers ..

So there has never been a truly communistic country?

[bogan]

What do the upper class get out of the exploitation? Why is the physical violence being administered? And why do the "workers" stay if they are suffering physical violence?

Fancy houses/cars/other consumables, don't have to work as hard themselves. Dunno, cos they is cunts I guess. Dunno, cos there is no other options I guess.

What I do know, is there is no reason to play connect the dots with money and any bad part of society you can find.

[scumdog]

So there has never been a truly communistic country?

No, they've all been tarnished with capitalist ailments like bribery and corruption...

Those high up milked the lower echelons and amassed personal fortunes of various sorts, side-tracked goods and materials meant for the general population.

[mashman]

Fancy houses/cars/other consumables, don't have to work as hard themselves. Dunno, cos they is cunts I guess. Dunno, cos there is no other options I guess.

What I do know, is there is no reason to play connect the dots with money and any bad part of society you can find.

Ok.

You blame society, where even Ocean called it before i.e. 1 in 300 million are "bad", so I don't blame society, I blame the mechanism i.e. financial system, for allowing these people to be "bad". After all, if the money wasn't there and we lived in "my" world, ye olde rich cunt doesn't exist and has zero power over people. That is a fact. I don't know any poor people who hold the livelihoods of billions of people in their hands, do you?

There's always an alternative.


No, they've all been tarnished with capitalist ailments like bribery and corruption...

Those high up milked the lower echelons and amassed personal fortunes of various sorts, side-tracked goods and materials meant for the general population.

So buying people off with money to do something that they know is "wrong"? Hmmmmm, and let me guess, you're going to say that that is a human problem? Because that would be a quaint and novel reason for explaining why yet another person has fucked someone over where they usually wouldn't... and the only reason that they have is because they've been given money.

I don't doubt it, and there is at least 1 way to stop that sort of activity... and it isn't going to be achieved through financial regulation or de-regulation, Greenspan found that out the hard way (or he lied and knew exactly what the financial system allows people to get away with).

[bogan]

Ok.

You blame society, where even Ocean called it before i.e. 1 in 300 million are "bad", so I don't blame society, I blame the mechanism i.e. financial system, for allowing these people to be "bad". After all, if the money wasn't there and we lived in "my" world, ye olde rich cunt doesn't exist and has zero power over people. That is a fact. I don't know any poor people who hold the livelihoods of billions of people in their hands, do you?

There's always an alternative.

It the 'allow' part that is the keyword. Were it the fault of money it would not just allow but encourage it, which it does not. Maybe there is a better system to discourage that sort of behaviour, but I've yet to see one that could work on a large scale. Was money around when the slaves built the pyramids?

As discussed in the other thread, 'your' world is very poorly thought out.

[Ocean1]

Nope. They are there being exploited to support the upper class.

How do you define upper class in this particular case?

[Ocean1]

So there has never been a truly communistic country?

Probably right actually. Is simply a poor system, no real feedback control mechanisms where it counts: Who decides who gets what, and at what cost.

[bogan]

How do you define upper class in this particular case?

Those doing the exploiting?

[scumdog]

O


So buying people off with money to do something that they know is "wrong"? Hmmmmm, and let me guess, you're going to say that that is a human problem? Because that would be a quaint and novel reason for explaining why yet another person has fucked someone over where they usually wouldn't... and the only reason that they have is because they've been given money OR power or items or land



Fixed your sentence Mashy!:2thumbsup

[Ocean1]

Ok.

You blame society, where even Ocean called it before i.e. 1 in 300 million are "bad", so I don't blame society, I blame the mechanism i.e. financial system, for allowing these people to be "bad". After all, if the money wasn't there and we lived in "my" world, ye olde rich cunt doesn't exist and has zero power over people. That is a fact.

It's bollox. China does use currency, but at the level you see in that factory money is not the driving force. The black hats in sweatshops like that are what you'd call local govt, a mix of local officials with the power to assign jobs, land etc. Money's not relevant, the peasants don't have any.

You've got this evel = rich prick picture in your head. It distorts your perceptions of the world to the point that you're no longer seeing the real world. So your "facts"... aren't.

[mashman]

It the 'allow' part that is the keyword. Were it the fault of money it would not just allow but encourage it, which it does not. Maybe there is a better system to discourage that sort of behaviour, but I've yet to see one that could work on a large scale. Was money around when the slaves built the pyramids?

As discussed in the other thread, 'your' world is very poorly thought out.

"allow" is circumstantial. If something is there to be legally taken, then it is allowed. Money is there to be legally taken and the pursuit of that money has bad people doing bad things because they make huge profits and could never get away with it in their own country. The Egyptians used bags of grain, copper and silver. As I've said, barter can put people in a position of power, which is one of the reasons I wouldn't use it. The only value there should be on any resource is how useful is it to human beings in regards to necessity. Anything renewable or at least made to be able to be recycled easily can be made into anything we like for toys. The key is to make it recyclable and minimise the $2 (or $2 million) waste.

It may well be poorly thought out, but it still kicks the arse off of the current world we live in and there is no question about that. The positives outweigh the negatives by a considerable distance and things that can't be achieved in a financial system are easily achievable in "my" world". So even in it's ill thought out state, "my" world can still beat your world up.

Given that "my" world has come from my mind (primarily), what could you do given your experiences and thought processes to augment/improve "my" world? Essentially that is what needs to happen. It needs a group of interested people to dot the i's and cross the t's before the questions of "but what do I get out of it? why should he get more than me because I earn more than him? I am a vastly more intelligent being, I should be favoured?" and all of those, I am entitled to the world owing me a better living than someone else because of X questions, can be answered with any great degree of purpose. That will take time, but it needs to be done. Notice that there is no mention of me shaping "my" world.

[mashman]

Probably right actually. Is simply a poor system, no real feedback control mechanisms where it counts: Who decides who gets what, and at what cost.

Poor logistics'll do that though eh.


Fixed your sentence Mashy!:2thumbsup

heh... fair enough, but where's the point in being appeased by power or land if it isn't worth anything?


It's bollox. China does use currency, but at the level you see in that factory money is not the driving force. The black hats in sweatshops like that are what you'd call local govt, a mix of local officials with the power to assign jobs, land etc. Money's not relevant, the peasants don't have any.

You've got this evel = rich prick picture in your head. It distorts your perceptions of the world to the point that you're no longer seeing the real world. So your "facts"... aren't.

I was with you right up your "etc.". Do the peasants not buy food? Do the peasants not buy clothing? Do the peasants not buy tools?

No I don't. I will ever hold out hope that you'll stop telling me what my perception of others is when you have absolutely no clue what the my image of "bad" people is. So no, it doesn't distort my perception at all. The logic that without money/barter/trade etc... and with the only reliance being on cooperation that the world would not only still function, but would accelerate in just about every avenue of human endeavor is undeniable. Just because you refuse to understand that logic doesn't make it flawed or achievable.

[scumdog]

heh... fair enough, but where's the point in being appeased by power or land if it isn't worth anything?



Yes it is - power to get stuff for nothing/get stuff done for nothing.

Land to raise crops on/charge rent for etc

Sheesh, do I HAVE to spell it out for you?:pinch:l

[Ocean1]

Those doing the exploiting?

OK. But it's not clear who you think that is.

Is it always the upper class that does the exploiting?

[mashman]

Yes it is - power to get stuff for nothing/get stuff done for nothing.

Land to raise crops on/charge rent for etc

Sheesh, do I HAVE to spell it out for you?:pinch:l

How do you hold that power over people?

So, get money then.

:rofl:... nope, just clarifying to see if you can explain it in any other way than in financial terms.

[bogan]

"allow" is circumstantial. If something is there to be legally taken, then it is allowed. Money is there to be legally taken and the pursuit of that money has bad people doing bad things because they make huge profits and could never get away with it in their own country. The Egyptians used bags of grain, copper and silver. As I've said, barter can put people in a position of power, which is one of the reasons I wouldn't use it. The only value there should be on any resource is how useful is it to human beings in regards to necessity. Anything renewable or at least made to be able to be recycled easily can be made into anything we like for toys. The key is to make it recyclable and minimise the $2 (or $2 million) waste.

It may well be poorly thought out, but it still kicks the arse off of the current world we live in and there is no question about that. The positives outweigh the negatives by a considerable distance and things that can't be achieved in a financial system are easily achievable in "my" world". So even in it's ill thought out state, "my" world can still beat your world up.

Given that "my" world has come from my mind (primarily), what could you do given your experiences and thought processes to augment/improve "my" world? Essentially that is what needs to happen. It needs a group of interested people to dot the i's and cross the t's before the questions of "but what do I get out of it? why should he get more than me because I earn more than him? I am a vastly more intelligent being, I should be favoured?" and all of those, I am entitled to the world owing me a better living than someone else because of X questions, can be answered with any great degree of purpose. That will take time, but it needs to be done. Notice that there is no mention of me shaping "my" world.

I don't mean legally allowing it, but how the system allows such types of behaviour. 'your' system does little to stop it either.

lol, if the other thread is anything to go by, there are many many questions are had about that

[bogan]

OK. But it's not clear who you think that is.

Is it always the upper class that does the exploiting?

I wouldn't read into it too much, I didn't before posting it. Governement and managerial people etc.

Depends on the system, mashy would have us move to one wide open to exploitation from the 'lower' class, so no, definitely not always. And our current one is open to exploitation from the lower classes too.

[Ocean1]

I was with you right up your "etc.". Do the peasants not buy food? Do the peasants not buy clothing? Do the peasants not buy tools?

It's complicated. Yes the peasants have money. Their economy is described in a couple of dollars per day, of use only amongst peasants. Even that's restricted by what goods are available from outside the village. Only good citizens get to buy luxury goods like a walking tractor or an irrigation pump.


No I don't. I will ever hold out hope that you'll stop telling me what my perception of others is when you have absolutely no clue what the my image of "bad" people is. So no, it doesn't distort my perception at all. The logic that without money/barter/trade etc... and with the only reliance being on cooperation that the world would not only still function, but would accelerate in just about every avenue of human endeavor is undeniable. Just because you refuse to understand that logic doesn't make it flawed or achievable.

The target of your bile is exclusively "the rich cunts". So much so in fact that it's pretty obvious that you cherry pick world news for rich pricks behaving badly and then posting a wee rant about them. It's the function of this thread. Isn't it?

And what passes for you as "undeniable logic is simply wishful thinking. Sloppy wishful thinking at that, I could make a better case for banning water because of the hardship and unfairness it promulgates.

[mashman]

I don't mean legally allowing it, but how the system allows such types of behaviour. 'your' system does little to stop it either.

lol, if the other thread is anything to go by, there are many many questions are had about that

The system allows it because it's legal. If it's illegal then the system doesn't allow it. It doesn't stop it, but it doesn't allow it. But it's all down to the legality in regards to what is allowed.

:rofl: funny that. It's amusing that no one would accept that you can have what you have today as an answer. Which leaves only one question, the one that no one really likes: Why do you believe they you are worth more than someone else? Some will hide behind the market valuation (Ocean), some will hide behind not answering the question (Oscar) and some will avoid answering it entirely and will either run away, change the subject, start with personal attacks or will resort to human nature as an excuse despite, ironically, the fact that the poll was about 50/50. But if all people are going to care about is what they get instead of what our (every man woman and child irrespective of colour, race, nationality, gender, age, weight, looks, "intelligence", laziness etc...) future could be, then those answers will need to be prepared in such a way that they appease those me me me characters. Granted that's almost impossible, but that's where numbers come into it. If people love to run with the herd so much, which they do oh yes how they love their majority, then those questions can be alleviated somewhat by the weight of numbers that accept what is obviously the better way of doing things :D

[Ocean1]

Yes it is - power to get stuff for nothing/get stuff done for nothing.

Land to raise crops on/charge rent for etc.l


Land isn't rented in China. At least land for raising crops isn't.

Two thirds of Chinese are officially designated farmers. They're great ones for compartmentalising everyone, every man a place and every man in his place. Or else. Any land not steeper than 15 degrees is deemed arable, and in theory every farmer is assigned his share of that land. How much land? 1000 square metres. From a lump of dirt the size of an old school kiwi section that farmer feeds himself and half of another countryman.

And here's the crunch: those lumps of dirt aren't automatically assigned to every new adult farmer. Most, probably. But the local party faithful are apt to find all sorts of reasons some of the less desirable might not get one. And that's just the tip of the corruption iceberg. And all without the hint of a yen.

[bogan]

The system allows it because it's legal. If it's illegal then the system doesn't allow it. It doesn't stop it, but it doesn't allow it. But it's all down to the legality in regards to what is allowed.

:rofl: funny that. It's amusing that no one would accept that you can have what you have today as an answer. Which leaves only one question, the one that no one really likes: Why do you believe they you are worth more than someone else? Some will hide behind the market valuation (Ocean), some will hide behind not answering the question (Oscar) and some will avoid answering it entirely and will either run away, change the subject, start with personal attacks or will resort to human nature as an excuse despite, ironically, the fact that the poll was about 50/50. But if all people are going to care about is what they get instead of what our (every man woman and child irrespective of colour, race, nationality, gender, age, weight, looks, "intelligence", laziness etc...) future could be, then those answers will need to be prepared in such a way that they appease those me me me characters. Granted that's almost impossible, but that's where numbers come into it. If people love to run with the herd so much, which they do oh yes how they love their majority, then those questions can be alleviated somewhat by the weight of numbers that accept what is obviously the better way of doing things :D

Again, I'm not talking about the manifestation of the behavior's legality or otherwise, but how the system deals with an individual's greed and laziness.

Ah, showing you selectivity again I see. Like I (and others time and time again) have said in the other thread, its not the individual that is worth more, but the work that the individual does; it's a system to balance out the need/benefit/enjoyment (or lack thereof) of different jobs. Trying to bullshit your way past without addressing that point is what makes 'your' system such a shit idea. Claiming the poll is 50/50 also shows your selectivity and bias.
We went over this in the other thread, I see no reason to try again when you don't even attempt to enter into an unbiased discussion.

[Ocean1]

I wouldn't read into it too much, I didn't before posting it. Governement and managerial people etc.

Depends on the system, mashy would have us move to one wide open to exploitation from the 'lower' class, so no, definitely not always. And our current one is open to exploitation from the lower classes too.

One of the few things that rarks me up is the occasional immigrant's reference to class systems in NZ. I don't think they exist. At least not in the sense that they do in the UK, for example. I think NZ do better than almost everywhere else on the planet at allowing everyone a reasonable chance at a good life based on their own effort. It ain't perfect, it's just better than most. I don't think a lot of Kiwis really understand what it is to be born predisposed to certain limits on your expectations of life. And I'm certain many immigrants see those limits here to the same degree they were in the old country. And they're wrong, they're so used to a society that blames the other "class" that they can't see that the limits are inside their heads.

Again, it's not perfect, but I really do think that here you can make a life that matches your effort and skill, at least more so than anywhere else. So I get tetchy at the rans about the proletariat this and the bourgeoisie that. It doesn't belong here. Never did, it's a toxic import, and we can do without it's petty bullshit.

[bogan]

One of the few things that rarks me up is the occasional immigrant's reference to class systems in NZ. I don't think they exist. At least not in the sense that they do in the UK, for example. I think NZ do better than almost everywhere else on the planet at allowing everyone a reasonable chance at a good life based on their own effort. It ain't perfect, it's just better than most. I don't think a lot of Kiwis really understand what it is to be born predisposed to certain limits on your expectations of life. And I]m certain many immigrants see those limits here to the same degree they were in the old country.

Again, it's not perfect, but I really do think that here you can make a life that matches your effort and skill, at least more so than anywhere else. So I get tetchy at the rans about the proletariat this and the bourgeoisie that. It doesn't belong here. Never did, it's a toxic import, and we can do without it's petty bullshit.

Fair enough, I don't mean class in that respect, more class of job you currently have. I guess never having lived anywhere else that's pretty much what the 'class' has always seemed like to me, definitely something that can be raised by hard work, and not affected by birth-class.

[mashman]

It's complicated. Yes the peasants have money. Their economy is described in a couple of dollars per day, of use only amongst peasants. Even that's restricted by what goods are available from outside the village. Only good citizens get to buy luxury goods like a walking tractor or an irrigation pump.

I understand that it's complicated, but you classing money as irrelevant to these people where they are working for the sole purpose of earning (see I can use it in the right place) money was a bit silly.



The target of your bile is exclusively "the rich cunts". So much so in fact that it's pretty obvious that you cherry pick world news for rich pricks behaving badly and then posting a wee rant about them. It's the function of this thread. Isn't it?

And what passes for you as "undeniable logic is simply wishful thinking. Sloppy wishful thinking at that, I could make a better case for banning water because of the hardship and unfairness it promulgates.

Funny, I go to page 1, then page 2, then page 3 and see a mix of things and not all about rich cunts by any means. As I said, you've got no idea what I consider to be a rich cunt, none, zip, you have proven so time and time again, yet my insistence that you don't know only reaffirms your view that you know what I mean better than I do. That attitude sounds like that of a rich cunt. So no, I suggest you get your head out of your arse and reevaluate your opinions of my opinions. Actually, don't, coz it makes me laugh.

As for the news that I do post, it is merely recognising that wealth destroying people's lives. You can wrap any spin around that as you like, but that's all it will be, spin.

Wishful thinking? A human construct cannot be deconstructed by humans? :facepalm: and you have the balls to call me negative? Some things you've just got to work out for yourself. I know this, because I had to do it. It is well within the realms of possibility to have a financially free country, it merely takes trust and a decision to do so. Tis all up to you.

[mashman]

Again, I'm not talking about the manifestation of the behavior's legality or otherwise, but how the system deals with an individual's greed and laziness.

Ah, showing you selectivity again I see. Like I (and others time and time again) have said in the other thread, its not the individual that is worth more, but the work that the individual does; it's a system to balance out the need/benefit/enjoyment (or lack thereof) of different jobs. Trying to bullshit your way past without addressing that point is what makes 'your' system such a shit idea. Claiming the poll is 50/50 also shows your selectivity and bias.
We went over this in the other thread, I see no reason to try again when you don't even attempt to enter into an unbiased discussion.

Currently it uses austerity against the lazy (including many non lazy, they just don't get paid well enough). Currently it uses reward for the greedy (higher interest rates, time to do with as you please). In "my" world, as long as there are enough people doing what is essentiall, the best you can hope for is that the lazy end up Darwin candidates, failing that, they're being fed etc... and they aren't a drain on the finances of the country meaning that valuable resources after removed from others on the basis that we can't afford them. Greedy people will try to be greedy, but the only thing they be able to be greedy over is stuff. Both the lazy and the greedy will remain a minority and it would seem a shame to punish the majority for the greed and laziness of others... but that's exactly what happens.

So you're hiding behind the market? You value some jobs over others. As I tried to explain to you, which you obviously flat refused to accept, you only ever need a doctor when you need a doctor, you only ever need a plumber when you need a plumber, you only ever need a binman when you need a binman. They're all required. Living without a doctor, hope you don't get ill. Living without a plumber, hope you don't mind the waste of water (that breeds disease, unless you have a way to clean water :innocent:). Living without the binman, hope you don't mind living in a tip (that breeds disease). The minute you start to value one job over another is the day that you lose yourself as a human being in my opinion. You didn't like that answer, but it did address your point.

Selective bias reading from the poll? 37 yes v 34 no. Selective? :rofl:@selective bias. It's a choice. I have made mine, in fact I have changed my mind from your side of the fence to my current side of the fence. Choice.

[bogan]

Currently it uses austerity against the lazy (including many non lazy, they just don't get paid well enough). Currently it uses reward for the greedy (higher interest rates, time to do with as you please). In "my" world, as long as there are enough people doing what is essentiall, the best you can hope for is that the lazy end up Darwin candidates, failing that, they're being fed etc... and they aren't a drain on the finances of the country meaning that valuable resources after removed from others on the basis that we can't afford them. Greedy people will try to be greedy, but the only thing they be able to be greedy over is stuff. Both the lazy and the greedy will remain a minority and it would seem a shame to punish the majority for the greed and laziness of others... but that's exactly what happens.

So you're hiding behind the market? You value some jobs over others. As I tried to explain to you, which you obviously flat refused to accept, you only ever need a doctor when you need a doctor, you only ever need a plumber when you need a plumber, you only ever need a binman when you need a binman. They're all required. Living without a doctor, hope you don't get ill. Living without a plumber, hope you don't mind the waste of water (that breeds disease, unless you have a way to clean water :innocent:). Living without the binman, hope you don't mind living in a tip (that breeds disease). The minute you start to value one job over another is the day that you lose yourself as a human being in my opinion. You didn't like that answer, but it did address your point.

Selective bias reading from the poll? 37 yes v 34 no. Selective? :rofl:@selective bias. It's a choice. I have made mine, in fact I have changed my mind from your side of the fence to my current side of the fence. Choice.

Same old shit, different day, different thread. I'm outa here, like you wish you could do with all the money.

[mashman]

Same old shit, different day, different thread. I'm outa here, like you wish you could do with all the money.

So a hide behind the market and a run away. heh.

[Ocean1]

I understand that it's complicated, but you classing money as irrelevant to these people where they are working for the sole purpose of earning (see I can use it in the right place) money was a bit silly.

They were there because they had no alternative. Nothing to do with money.


It is well within the realms of possibility to have a financially free country, it merely takes trust and a decision to do so. Tis all up to you.

Of course it's possible. If you want to return to the stone age.

And I don't, ta.

[scumdog]

So a hide behind the market and a run away. heh.

Suits me too:bye:

[Ocean1]

So a hide behind the market and a run away. heh.

Maybe you'll have more luck convincing people when you start asking sellers of the products you buy how much they want for their stuff. And paying it.

Then we could laugh at the fact that you're silly enough to say that everyone's work is worth whatever they say it is AND stupid enough to believe it.

[mashman]

They were there because they had no alternative. Nothing to do with money.

Of course it's possible. If you want to return to the stone age.

And I don't, ta.

Nothing? What an interestingly weak thought process you have. Did you read the article?

That won't happen and you can't prove that it will. Smells like fear there.

That much I've gathered. Ahhhh, New Zealand, built on a culture of following the next guy rightly or wrongly.


Suits me too:bye:

Bubye.


Maybe you'll have more luck convincing people when you start asking sellers of the products you buy how much they want for their stuff. And paying it.

Then we could laugh at the fact that you're silly enough to say that everyone's work is worth whatever they say it is AND stupid enough to believe it.

I dunno. I say that I'm not trying to convince anyone and that the only person that can convince you is you, and you go and type something completely to the contrary. I can't describe the level of fail.

:facepalm:

[mashman]

Exoneration? The Link Between Money And Corruption Is More Insidious Than We Thought (http://nz.finance.yahoo.com/news/between-money-corruption-far-more-161613084.html)... some people are just weak minded or have at least been subliminally programmed to be a moron.

"It makes a lot of sense that greed would produce evil," Smith-Crowe said. "But we were interested in the fact that maybe it's not even love of money, but just the mere subtle exposure to the concept of money that, in and of itself, may also be corrupting.". Just an exchange mechanism eh :facepalm:

[Ocean1]

Exoneration?

Of your obsessive need to blather on about some ill considered, nonsensical moneyless utopia as a magical counter to the hoards of shysters intent on destroying the world?

No.


Just an exchange mechanism eh

Yes. http://www.thefreedictionary.com/money


money
n. pl. mon·eys or mon·ies
1. A medium that can be exchanged for goods and services and is used as a measure of their values on the market, including among its forms a commodity such as gold, an officially issued coin or note, or a deposit in a checking account or other readily liquefiable account.

2. The official currency, coins, and negotiable paper notes issued by a government.

3. Assets and property considered in terms of monetary value; wealth.

I suggest that if anyone is trying to tell you that money has any other definition then you're looking at either a thief or an idiot. No real news there, there's hardly a shortage of either.

[mashman]

Of your obsessive need to blather on about some ill considered, nonsensical moneyless utopia as a magical counter to the hoards of shysters intent on destroying the world?

No.

Yes. http://www.thefreedictionary.com/money

I suggest that if anyone is trying to tell you that money has any other definition then you're looking at either a thief or an idiot. No real news there, there's hardly a shortage of either.

I can see why you might have thought that when I said exoneration, that I was talking about me, but I wasn't, moreover yourself. But I;m used to people getting the wrong end of the stick... some make a habit of it.

Oh WOW, a dictionary definition. Lame.

No one is telling me anything as my mental fortitude understands that money is much more than a means of exchange... but hey, some people just don't care to think beyond a dictionary definition to absolve themselves of the damage that their self interest perpetuates. Weak, but understandable.

[Oscar]

I can see why you might have thought that when I said exoneration, that I was talking about me, but I wasn't, moreover yourself. But I;m used to people getting the wrong end of the stick... some make a habit of it.

Oh WOW, a dictionary definition. Lame.

No one is telling me anything as my mental fortitude understands that money is much more than a means of exchange... but hey, some people just don't care to think beyond a dictionary definition to absolve themselves of the damage that their self interest perpetuates. Weak, but understandable.

You're used to people getting the wrong end of the stick?

That's nothing to do with all the shit you talk, is it?

Your post above is a great example - I have never seen anyone refer to "their mental fortitude" in the third person.
And I like how you understand that people are weak.
What a guy.

[Ocean1]

No one is telling me anything.

That's been sorta obvious for quite a while now.

[mashman]

You're used to people getting the wrong end of the stick?

That's nothing to do with all the shit you talk, is it?

Your post above is a great example - I have never seen anyone refer to "their mental fortitude" in the third person.
And I like how you understand that people are weak.
What a guy.

Yup.

Probably.

Third person?
It's called empathy.
Ta.

[mashman]

That's been sorta obvious for quite a while now.

Merely clarifying your concern "I suggest that if anyone is trying to tell you".

[blue rider]

and in other news.....of the non financial variety

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/06/14/1216199/-NASA-finds-spikes-of-methane-CO2-above-Arctic

[Oscar]

Yup.

Probably.

Third person?
It's called empathy.
Ta.

No it isn't.
Empathy is the capacity to recognize emotions that are being experienced by another person
Agreeing with your self is megalomania.

[mashman]

No it isn't.
Empathy is the capacity to recognize emotions that are being experienced by another person
Agreeing with your self is megalomania.

I was empathising with your weakness, not my mental strength.

When TPTB can only think in economic terms, this sort of shit is allowed to happen (http://wewillblowyourmind.blogspot.co.uk/2013/05/800-scientists-demand-global-gmo.html).

[blue rider]

emotions running to high, music is needed



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v1TsCud9QhU


we can discuss the state of the affairs as much as we won't, fact is we won't be changing anything.
but sometimes discussing the state of the affairs is better then doing nothing.


and at the end of the day, we can all agree to not agree..

[mashman]

we can discuss the state of the affairs as much as we won't, fact is we won't be changing anything.
but sometimes discussing the state of the affairs is better then doing nothing.

and at the end of the day, we can all agree to not agree..

It won't, but as you say showing what our world is capable of is better than doing nothing. It may even help is years to come.

We can all agree to disagree... some people bank on it going as far as that.

[mashman]

Fitch says China credit bubble unprecedented in modern world history (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/china-business/10123507/Fitch-says-China-credit-bubble-unprecedented-in-modern-world-history.html)... I guess you can't keep running around the world buying everything you like and not end up having to pay for it.

[Oscar]

Fitch says China credit bubble unprecedented in modern world history (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/china-business/10123507/Fitch-says-China-credit-bubble-unprecedented-in-modern-world-history.html)... I guess you can't keep running around the world buying everything you like and not end up having to pay for it.

You don't believe in history.
You need to keep your story straight, Dickwad.

[mashman]

You don't believe in history.
You need to keep your story straight, Dickwad.

Yeah, ya see that article is referencing the present and alluding to a future collapse dumb arse.
You need to make up better story's.

[scumdog]

Fitch says China credit bubble unprecedented in modern world history (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/china-business/10123507/Fitch-says-China-credit-bubble-unprecedented-in-modern-world-history.html)... I guess you can't keep running around the world buying everything you like and not end up having to pay for it.

They is trying to sprint before they can crawl - in a financial sense.

[mashman]

They is trying to sprint before they can crawl - in a financial sense.

heh... tis certainly one way of looking at it. Although another way would be that they've hit the same problems that the West hit 5 years ago and for some unknow reason maybe, just maybe, thought that the outcome would be different for them. Amusing.

[Oscar]

Yeah, ya see that article is referencing the present and alluding to a future collapse dumb arse.
You need to make up better story's.

I notice that when you get caught out, you resort to abuse and simple lying.
You need to read your own links.


The ratio of credit to GDP has jumped by 75 percentage points to 200pc of GDP, compared to roughly 40 points in the US over five years leading up to the subprime bubble, or in Japan before the Nikkei bubble burst in 1990.

I quoted Santayana and you said:


Those who live in the past limit their future.


I was 9 and the world was in the hands of capable people up until about 5 years ago.

Make up what's left of your mind you idiot.

[mashman]

I notice that when you get caught out, you resort to abuse and simple lying.
You need to read your own links.

Make up what's left of your mind you idiot.

Caught out? Like I said, you need to make up better story's. I read the link fine and it is looking at the present state of the Chinese credit bubble and comparing it to the historical events of, well, forever and saying that this is even bigger given the current/present state.

[Oscar]

Caught out? Like I said, you need to make up better story's. I read the link fine and it is looking at the present state of the Chinese credit bubble and comparing it to the historical events of, well, forever and saying that this is even bigger given the current/present state.

Yawn.....you're getting boring now.
And you're starting to contradict yourself, something that isn't easy for a simpleton like you, I suppose...

[avgas]

You value some jobs over others. As I tried to explain to you, which you obviously flat refused to accept, you only ever need a doctor when you need a doctor, you only ever need a plumber when you need a plumber, you only ever need a binman when you need a binman. They're all required. Living without a doctor, hope you don't get ill. Living without a plumber, hope you don't mind the waste of water (that breeds disease, unless you have a way to clean water :innocent:). Living without the binman, hope you don't mind living in a tip (that breeds disease). The minute you start to value one job over another is the day that you lose yourself as a human being in my opinion. You didn't like that answer, but it did address your point.

Yeah but what about those of us who can do fine with none-of-em. As mentioned earlier. No reason to go to work for $ to pay the doctor or binman, I'm out of here. What do you propose to keep people like me, with humble skills that ARE required by society to stay with society.
I mentioned earlier, provided there is no black plague etc - I am confident I can survive quite comfortably on my own.
And if there was some horrible outbreak of something, you really believe doctors will save you?

What happens to your system when all the people whom are required by society, suddenly up and leave society to it? What is the backup?

I am all for you idea, sounds like a great holiday for me.

[mashman]

Yeah but what about those of us who can do fine with none-of-em. As mentioned earlier. No reason to go to work for $ to pay the doctor or binman, I'm out of here. What do you propose to keep people like me, with humble skills that ARE required by society to stay with society.
I mentioned earlier, provided there is no black plague etc - I am confident I can survive quite comfortably on my own.
And if there was some horrible outbreak of something, you really believe doctors will save you?

What happens to your system when all the people whom are required by society, suddenly up and leave society to it? What is the backup?

I am all for you idea, sounds like a great holiday for me.

As I said earlier, by all means fuck off to the country and do nothing. If you're happy with taking your skills away from those who could use them, then that is entirely up to you. Yes I realise that if enough people decide to live in such a way the whole thing will fail, then so be it, but the opportunity will be there to make it a success. That and your kids won't be allowed to play in our society, ha, just jokin, but that is my driver, the future for the kid that is and not just mine. I'd happily shuffle off this mortal coil knowing that my contribution made a difference to the future of others and gave a future to others.
Just because you remove yourself from the general populous and decide to do nothing doesn't exclude you from receiving that which society produces. There'll be enough of us to cover your absence, and as mentioned above, it's entirely your choice should you wish to throw your needed skills into the mix.
If there is an outbreak, if the Dr's decide not to save you, then I'm pretty sure they'll figure out that the outbreak will eventually get them given the lack of prevention.

The backup is we end up going back to a financial system. If people up and leave, people up and leave. Meh.

Would you settle for working 3 - 4 hours for 3 or 4 days a week?

[mashman]

Bit of a scarey read really (http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/earth-insight/2013/jun/14/climate-change-energy-shocks-nsa-prism?CMP=twt_gu)

"Top secret US National Security Agency (NSA) documents disclosed by the Guardian have shocked the world with revelations of a comprehensive US-based surveillance system with direct access to Facebook, Apple, Google, Microsoft and other tech giants. New Zealand court records suggest that data harvested by the NSA's Prism system has been fed into the Five Eyes intelligence alliance whose members also include the UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand."

"The study also warned of a possible shortfall in global oil output by 2015"

"The Pentagon knows that environmental, economic and other crises could provoke widespread public anger toward government and corporations in coming years. The revelations on the NSA's global surveillance programmes are just the latest indication that as business as usual creates instability at home and abroad, and as disillusionment with the status quo escalates, Western publics are being increasingly viewed as potential enemies that must be policed by the state."

[racetosun]

Why should we even think that academics or politicians will solve all our problems? :brick:

[mashman]

Why should we even think that academics or politicians will solve all our problems? :brick:

The downside is that they're in a position to do something about it. The upside is that they're in a position to do something about it. The downside is that they don't know what to do and are awaiting instructions, I mean waiting to take advice on the situation. But I agree with you, I think "normal" people understand the issues and would choose to do what is best for the majority than follow orders. Ahhhh dreams.

[avgas]

Would you settle for working 3 - 4 hours for 3 or 4 days a week?
Sure - but you can't bank on it. Never know what could happen when I come to town.
<iframe src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/60327945" width="360" height="270" frameborder="0" webkitAllowFullScreen mozallowfullscreen allowFullScreen></iframe> <p><a href="http://vimeo.com/60327945">Steve Earle - "Copperhead Road" [Official MCA Music Video]</a> from <a href="http://vimeo.com/sonicislandmedia">Sonic Island Media</a> on <a href="http://vimeo.com">Vimeo</a>.</p>

[mashman]

Sure - but you can't bank on it. Never know what could happen when I come to town.

Did you pun? Better than nuffink and I don't think many of us'll mind you playin yer geetar when ya get to town.

[cc rider]

Just checking if the world's still stupid...


:wait:


:wait:



:stupid:

[Scuba_Steve]

Just checking if the world's still stupid...



You not use the roads today?

[avgas]

Stupid is as stupid does. What a fucking stupid thing to say.

[Banditbandit]

Just checking if the world's still stupid...



Yeah .. it's running at 58 today ..

http://krant28.wordpress.com/

[mashman]

Just checking if the world's still stupid...


:wait:


:wait:



:stupid:

Yes it is... but with slightly heavier reign.

[mashman]

MoD serves news outlets with D notice over surveillance leaks (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/17/defence-d-bbc-media-censor-surveillance-security)

Lock up your media (http://order-order.com/2010/11/26/that-wikileaks-d-notice/)

[mashman]

heh... I gotta make more time to watch these


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2AvU2cfXRk&feature=youtu.be

[blue rider]

Alaska, awesome in green

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/06/23-1

[mashman]

Alaska, awesome in green

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/06/23-1

Linky nono worko for meo. Will try from home later.

[mashman]

Sucks to be a doley that doesn't want to be. (http://notinthepink.com/2013/06/23/this-is-your-government/)

[blue rider]

interesting read on the three strikes provision in the US...its 5 pages, so it is a bit of a read.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/cruel-and-unusual-punishment-the-shame-of-three-strikes-laws-20130327?page=5

[blue rider]

Sucks to be a doley that doesn't want to be. (http://notinthepink.com/2013/06/23/this-is-your-government/)


the new norm, catch 22's everywhere.
but hey she should just get a haircut and a job ....:facepalm:

[mashman]

interesting read on the three strikes provision in the US...its 5 pages, so it is a bit of a read.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/cruel-and-unusual-punishment-the-shame-of-three-strikes-laws-20130327?page=5

:shit::gob:... no money, no criminals.


the new norm, catch 22's everywhere.
but hey she should just get a haircut and a job ....:facepalm:

Aye, like the one in your Rolling Stone article:

"It would later turn out that in order for Gaines' jail doctors to consult with his normal prison doctors, he needed to make a request in writing. The only problem was, he had no paper. This issue had come up before, when Gaines tried to apply for acceptance into a post-release­ program. The only way to get paper was something straight out of Catch-22: He had to make a request – in writing."

Stupid world alright.

[scumdog]

"It would later turn out that in order for Gaines' jail doctors to consult with his normal prison doctors, he needed to make a request in writing. The only problem was, he had no paper. This issue had come up before, when Gaines tried to apply for acceptance into a post-release­ program. The only way to get paper was something straight out of Catch-22: He had to make a request – in writing."



One way of keeping people in prison eh...:whistle:

[mashman]

One way of keeping people in prison eh...:whistle:

Gotta get them in there in the first place (http://intellihub.com/2013/05/22/pennsylvania-judge-sentenced-for-28-years-for-selling-kids-to-the-prison-system/)

[blue rider]

One way of keeping people in prison eh...:whistle:


or else you and your mates might be future dolebludgers ei?

[blue rider]

how to bankrupt a nation....and no it was not the ordinary joe and jane sixpack wanting to buy houses n' shit.

http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/tapes-that-reveal-what-really-led-to-national-collapse-29366839.html

[mashman]

how to bankrupt a nation....and no it was not the ordinary joe and jane sixpack wanting to buy houses n' shit.

http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/tapes-that-reveal-what-really-led-to-national-collapse-29366839.html

Holy FUCK... I wonder how true that is?

[blue rider]

Holy FUCK... I wonder how true that is?

it appears to be quite true, and on tape.
thats the thing, a bit like nixon and so many others...they too are recordered and under surveillance.

the notion that banks don't rig the system is quaint. when an institution is considered to big to fail...that institution is to big to exists.

but lets continue blaming ourselves and our neighbours...those that seem to have more than us for living beyond their means and those that don't have enough for living to lavishly....you see what I am doing here?

[mashman]

it appears to be quite true, and on tape.
thats the thing, a bit like nixon and so many others...they too are recordered and under surveillance.

the notion that banks don't rig the system is quaint. when an institution is considered to big to fail...that institution is to big to exists.

but lets continue blaming ourselves and our neighbours...those that seem to have more than us for living beyond their means and those that don't have enough for living to lavishly....you see what I am doing here?

:rofl:... yeah them thar banks is all squeaky clean and as long as the politicians stick to the script, the professionals will look in the wrong direction whilst believing they can prove the politicians point.

Whereas it all started with a brain fart (http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-06-24/biggest-ponzi-scheme-history-world)

[mashman]

It's all in the context. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/patrick-butler-cuts-blog/2013/jun/24/food-poverty-growth-in-shoplifting-groceries?CMP=twt_gu) Give people the money and they will not have to resort to crime. Don't and they will, irrespective of how good a person they are.

[Smifffy]

It's all in the context. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/patrick-butler-cuts-blog/2013/jun/24/food-poverty-growth-in-shoplifting-groceries?CMP=twt_gu) Give people the money and they will not have to resort to crime. Don't and they will, irrespective of how good a person they are.

So what about the people that get given money and still commit crime? What about the people that commit non-violent but lucrative crime and then still commit violent crimes?

[blue rider]

So what about the people that get given money and still commit crime? What about the people that commit non-violent but lucrative crime and then still commit violent crimes?


People will find ways to survive when they can't find jobs and assistance is not covering the basics.
This is not new....this is as old as is the world.


In any case, the article does not refer to career criminals, it refers to people that buy stolen food (fallen of the truck we used to call that), because they can't afford the food in the supermarkets any more. (and most likely the odd other good that fell of the truck - ooops)

Violent criminals are not the same as someone who steels a pair of baby shoes, or a pack of bacon. They are not the same as someone who is apprehended smoking a joint.

As for the non violent but lucrative criminals? You mean the bankers that got us in to the financial crisis with speculation and credit default swaps? Lehman Brothers? Goldman Sachs?AIG? - at last check all were to big to fail and to big to jail...well all but Lehman Brothers, they were allowed to go bust. I believe all these very lucrative criminals are still in bread and butter. Do you really want to compare them to some unemployed schmuck whose benefit has just been shortened by a couple of pounds or dollars?


Fuck, really what the fuck!

[Ocean1]

It's all in the context. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/patrick-butler-cuts-blog/2013/jun/24/food-poverty-growth-in-shoplifting-groceries?CMP=twt_gu) Give people the money and they will not have to resort to crime. Don't and they will, irrespective of how good a person they are.

It's called a protection racket. And as I've said before, they can get fukt.

[mashman]

So what about the people that get given money and still commit crime? What about the people that commit non-violent but lucrative crime and then still commit violent crimes?

Exactly the same as those who have billions and still go after even more billions. It's all about the money.

[mashman]

It's called a protection racket. And as I've said before, they can get fukt.

The downside is that these are the guys that write the cheques so that plebs like me can earn a living and buy your stuff. Take them out without managing how you take them out and you will end up in the dark ages, because the entire scheme will collapse. Sure it's a protection racket, but it goes way beyond that innit. Once upon a time it was a mechanism for trade... now it's a weapon... and it's all built on debt, confidence and our ignorance. They can get fukt, but as they write the rules, I can't see who's going to get fukt them, can you?

[Ocean1]

The downside is that these are the guys that write the cheques so that plebs like me can earn a living and buy your stuff. Take them out without managing how you take them out and you will end up in the dark ages, because the entire scheme will collapse.

No dole bludger has ever written me a cheque. And now that I check the memory the only one that ever needed to... didn't. If society had to forgo all spending from every single dole bludger in the country I doubt that there'd be as much as a tiny blip on the GDP stat's either way let alone any dark age.


Sure it's a protection racket, but it goes way beyond that innit.

No, the cause of criminal behaviour rarely goes any further than the criminal, it's just the criminal's world view that enables them to consider anyone else to blame.


Once upon a time it was a mechanism for trade... now it's a weapon... and it's all built on debt, confidence and our ignorance.

I presume you're onto your favourite anti money theme?

In which case you simply need to become less ignorant. Difficult, I know, and I did my bit with a well-turned proposal regarding the risks in borrowing money, but I see it didn’t register.


They can get fukt, but as they write the rules, I can't see who's going to get fukt them, can you?

The only people that'll be fukt are those that borrow money. Specifically, those that borrow money to support a lifestyle they can't afford. That'll fuk complete nations, it's fukt several already and it's looking like fuking the UK and several other ex 1st world lumps of Europe that think they can still live like they did when they actually generated external revenue. The US is looking decidedly average too, for exactly the same reason.

[scumdog]

or else you and your mates might be future dolebludgers ei?

Don't worry - there's enough stupid pricks and criminals being bred all the time..;)

[scumdog]

People will find ways to survive when they can't find jobs and assistance is not covering the basics.
This is not new....this is as old as is the world.


In any case, the article does not refer to career criminals, it refers to people that buy stolen food (fallen of the truck we used to call that), because they can't afford the food in the supermarkets any more. (and most likely the odd other good that fell of the truck - ooops)

!

If they gave up their booze, smokes and pokies they might just be able to buy food honestly...;)

[Big Dave]

<iframe width="480" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/dDLiVwpv89s?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[mashman]

Gayran Gayran yes, I freely admit I actually enjoyed the tune and may well have to resurrect the "I didn't think I'd like it" (or whatever the wording was) thread and, nahhhh, that's to much...

However as has been posted to me on numerous occasions, I think this is more suitable


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCEeAn6_QJo

[unstuck]

I think you should rename this thread to STUPID HUMANS......cos this world is pretty cool really.:yes:

[mashman]

No dole bludger has ever written me a cheque. And now that I check the memory the only one that ever needed to... didn't. If society had to forgo all spending from every single dole bludger in the country I doubt that there'd be as much as a tiny blip on the GDP stat's either way let alone any dark age.

I wasn't talking about the bludgers, I was talking about those who create the money in the first place.



No, the cause of criminal behaviour rarely goes any further than the criminal, it's just the criminal's world view that enables them to consider anyone else to blame.

:facepalm: did you read the article about the blackmarket food in the UK and those who are buying it? Do you think that people might have reasons for committing their crimes? After all, they don't do it day in day out, they get enough of what they need i.e. money to buy the shit they want, then do fuck all until they need more money... then they'll go out and commit crime. Tis the reason they do it, not because they are a criminal through and through.



I presume you're onto your favourite anti money theme?

In which case you simply need to become less ignorant. Difficult, I know, and I did my bit with a well-turned proposal regarding the risks in borrowing money, but I see it didn’t register.

Nope, I was describing how the current financial system.



The only people that'll be fukt are those that borrow money. Specifically, those that borrow money to support a lifestyle they can't afford. That'll fuk complete nations, it's fukt several already and it's looking like fuking the UK and several other ex 1st world lumps of Europe that think they can still live like they did when they actually generated external revenue. The US is looking decidedly average too, for exactly the same reason.

Which is everybody. Why do you think the Fed needed to pump $85 billions into the economy every month? Why do you think the NZ govt borrowing has quadrupled since the GFC? Name me 1 country that isn't in debt. So the fukt people I were referring to are those who have a fuckload of the money, coz they're the ones who are doing the damage. And just to make that clear, when I refer to damage I am referring to the hoarding the worlds precious money along with the damage that they have caused to industry and people's lives in general. I'm hoping that people have stopped buying stuff and that it gets much much worse, because frankly, the fukters haven't got a fuckin clue about anything other than making money and to hell with the rest of the world... and even at that, they don't have a fuckin clue how the economy works because they don't have a holistic view of it it any way shape or form (or do and just don't give a fuck)

[mashman]

And this is how we treat people because of money (http://nz.finance.yahoo.com/news/christchurch-red-zone-residents-may-011500113.html).

"Christchurch residents who continue to live in "red zone" areas may have to provide their own generator, water supply, sewerage facilities and roads in the future as local authorities won't fix services in those areas."

A resounding fuck you, because you are not worth the money. Fuck over individuals because they can't fight back... bunch of pathetic bully's that need a good fuckin kickin.

[gwigs]

And this is how we treat people because of money (http://nz.finance.yahoo.com/news/christchurch-red-zone-residents-may-011500113.html).

"Christchurch residents who continue to live in "red zone" areas may have to provide their own generator, water supply, sewerage facilities and roads in the future as local authorities won't fix services in those areas."

A resounding fuck you, because you are not worth the money. Fuck over individuals because they can't fight back... bunch of pathetic bully's that need a good fuckin kickin.

Must spread....

[Ocean1]

Give people the money and they will not have to resort to crime. Don't and they will, irrespective of how good a person they are.


It's called a protection racket. And as I've said before, they can get fukt.


I wasn't talking about the bludgers, I was talking about those who create the money in the first place.

Then you need to become less ignorant of comprehension.

[Ocean1]

Why do you think the Fed needed to pump $85 billions into the economy every month?

Because it allows them to continue to spend more than they earn for a while. S'ok, you'll be pleased to know the cows are coming home to roost and the hurt will be worser in the long run.

Oh, and the NZ example is peanuts by comparison, NZ's response to the GFC is beginning to be seen as a prudent example others could well learn from.

[avgas]

I found this quite interesting. Shows a bit of the other side.
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/ed2FWNWwE3I" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

If you think you're :brick: imagine being a refined tool to exploit financial markets.

[mashman]

Then you need to become less ignorant of comprehension.

And my response was in regards to the protection racket thingymajig that was in response to the financial ponzi scheme. Glass houses.


Because it allows them to continue to spend more than they earn for a while. S'ok, you'll be pleased to know the cows are coming home to roost and the hurt will be worser in the long run.

Oh, and the NZ example is peanuts by comparison, NZ's response to the GFC is beginning to be seen as a prudent example others could well learn from.

Who's them? And I hope they come home to roost soon as I'm bored watching the world rip itself apart because of ones and zeros that are plucked out of thin air.

That may well be the case, even still, it's at least 4 times as much as it was 5 years ago... and those gains can easily be wiped out should China go tits as it predicted.

[scumdog]

And this is how we treat people because of money (http://nz.finance.yahoo.com/news/christchurch-red-zone-residents-may-011500113.html).

"Christchurch residents who continue to live in "red zone" areas may have to provide their own generator, water supply, sewerage facilities and roads in the future as local authorities won't fix services in those areas."

.

I certainly hope they are not having to pay rates any more...

[Oscar]

And this is how we treat people because of money (http://nz.finance.yahoo.com/news/christchurch-red-zone-residents-may-011500113.html).

"Christchurch residents who continue to live in "red zone" areas may have to provide their own generator, water supply, sewerage facilities and roads in the future as local authorities won't fix services in those areas."

A resounding fuck you, because you are not worth the money. Fuck over individuals because they can't fight back... bunch of pathetic bully's that need a good fuckin kickin.

These idiots turned down the Government offer to help them move away from a place where housing was not sustainable due to an earthquake.
Now they want the council to continue to supply services.

Why don't you go down there and shovel their shit?
You do a good job here supplying excrement...

[mashman]

I certainly hope they are not having to pay rates any more...

I guess they're going to need the extra cash.

[mashman]

These idiots turned down the Government offer to help them move away from a place where housing was not sustainable due to an earthquake.
Now they want the council to continue to supply services.

Spoken like a true :tugger:

[Oscar]

Spoken like a true :tugger:

You have such a cutting wit, and are so good at arguing your case..

...no, wait a minute, you're just a ignorant blowhard who speaks in simplistic propaganda.

[mashman]

You have such a cutting wit, and are so good at arguing your case..

...no, wait a minute, you're just a ignorant blowhard who speaks in simplistic propaganda.

:yawn: you are a boring dickhead aintcha... and given your posts, quite sheeplike.

[Oscar]

:yawn: you are a boring dickhead aintcha... and given your posts, quite sheeplike.

The thing is, only a sheep would use the same ad hominem non-argument every time someone disagrees with them.
You are such a boring twat.

[Ocean1]

And my response was in regards to the protection racket thingymajig that was in response to the financial ponzi scheme.

Conventional dialogue has one replying to statements the other party made, not simply reiterating whatever drivel is foremost in what, (for the sake of current argument) we shall call your mind.

But don't bother going back to pick up the discussion from your fuckup, I can't be fukt trying to have a basic discussion with someone who doesn't know how.


Who's them? And I hope they come home to roost soon as I'm bored watching the world rip itself apart because of ones and zeros that are plucked out of thin air.

America. You not only can't comprehend a perfectly coherent reply but you can't follow a topic strand you introduced yourself.


That may well be the case, even still, it's at least 4 times as much as it was 5 years ago... and those gains can easily be wiped out should China go tits as it predicted.

So, they've done well by international standards, but you'd rather what? They borrowed more money to pay for your preferred social spending blowout? They printed more money to fund more services? They cut services to match current revenue? All of the above? Let's hear it from the expert.

[mashman]

Conventional dialogue has one replying to statements the other party made, not simply reiterating whatever drivel is foremost in what, (for the sake of current argument) we shall call your mind.

But don't bother going back to pick up the discussion from your fuckup, I can't be fukt trying to have a basic discussion with someone who doesn't know how.

bwaaaaa ha ha ha ha ha ha haaaaaaaaa... you changed the context, not me.



America. You not only can't comprehend a perfectly coherent reply but you can't follow a topic strand you introduced yourself.

I was merely seeking clarification :yawn:



So, they've done well by international standards, but you'd rather what? They borrowed more money to pay for your preferred social spending blowout? They printed more money to fund more services? They cut services to match current revenue? All of the above? Let's hear it from the expert.

They've already borrowed money and I can't see what they've done with it. They've printed more money (see LGFA for one). They've already cut services to try to match revenue and lo we're coming back to surplus (borrowing $40+ billion makes that easy). So they've done all of the above and people are still strapped for cash, people are still losing their jobs, the manufacturing sector is still complaining, Chch still needs its funding, fuck all has happened other than the people have born the brunt of financial fukery at the hands of supposedly financially literate people who, as it turns out, are fuckin useless.

I'm done with the conversation because you have absolutely no idea how the world works. Criminals are criminals irrespective of circumstance being the cherry. bubye

[Scuba_Steve]

Well not quite as political as the rest in here, but absolutely retarded nonetheless

Australia finally get R18 rating (30yrs late) still bans games the rest of the world allows. Seems they've just made R18 the new MA15+
(http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2013/06/26/australia-deems-saints-row-4-and-state-of-decay-too-crude-for-r18/)

Saints Row 4 banned, State of decay refused classification, GTA V... not yet rated, but don't hold your breath

[oneofsix]

Well not quite as political as the rest in here, but absolutely retarded nonetheless

Australia finally get R18 rating (30yrs late) still bans games the rest of the world allows. Seems they've just made R18 the new MA15+
(http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2013/06/26/australia-deems-saints-row-4-and-state-of-decay-too-crude-for-r18/)

Saints Row 4 banned, State of decay refused classification, GTA V... not yet rated, but don't hold your breath

if you really want to get your knickers in a twist try this


Gameplanet has contacted the game's Australian and New Zealand distributor to ascertain whether the ruling will impact on the release of Saints Row IV in New Zealand.

While the game has already been rated R18 in New Zealand, it's not clear whether game's Australian distributor will move ahead with local distribution for New Zealand only.

My guess is you wont be seeing it this side of the Tasman. :angry: distribution agreements. If they don't want to distribute it they should lose the rights and let others do it.

[Scuba_Steve]

if you really want to get your knickers in a twist try this


My guess is you wont be seeing it this side of the Tasman. :angry: distribution agreements. If they don't want to distribute it they should lose the rights and let others do it.

Nope they've already confirmed NZ will be getting the uncensored version, Stuffs always behind in news (usually days)

Deep Silver have just confirmed to NZGamer.com that the version of Saints Row IV that releases in New Zealand on August 22nd will be unmodified.

[oneofsix]

Nope they've already confirmed NZ will be getting the uncensored version, Stuffs always behind in news (usually days)

Deep Silver have just confirmed to NZGamer.com that the version of Saints Row IV that releases in New Zealand on August 22nd will be unmodified.

Yeah Stuff just caught up, suppose they have to wait for their "sources" to publish before they can get the "news"

[blue rider]

good read on easy money and such

http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/06/27/time-for-an-economy-of-by-and-for-the-people/

[Banditbandit]

you're just a ignorant blowhard who speaks in simplistic propaganda.

Errr .. are you likening him to DonKey ???

[Oscar]

Errr .. are you likening him to DonKey ???

Er, I think that covers most politicians, don't it?

[unstuck]

Stupid humans. http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/8858177/Gang-given-all-clear-to-run-lotteries :killingme

[mashman]

Stupid humans. http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/8858177/Gang-given-all-clear-to-run-lotteries :killingme

Aye, gambling licenses should only go to the trustworthy

Could you cope if interest rates rose? (http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/could-you-cope-if-interest-rates-rose--102039097.html)... don't know what they thought would happen with low interest rates and stagnant wages.

Violent clashes across the Egyptian cities of Alexandria and Port Said have left three people dead and more than 70 others injured. (http://uk.news.yahoo.com/protester-shot-dead-alexandria-clashes-172354654.html#7XiGwim)... so they're still unhappy. Well fuck me, who would have thought that more of the same from self-interested party's would result in same shit, different leader.

Texas teen charged with making terroristic threat after online joke (http://www.khou.com/news/texas-news/Texas-teen-charged-with-making-terroristic-threat-after-online-joke-212931111.html)... oh dear. Voicing what you would normally say in public and putting it in a written form online could land you 8 years in the US. Good to see that another terrorist has been stopped from committing mass murder...

lol

jk.

[blue rider]

oh look another 500 odd DFH's, this time in Cairo. Really I don't know whats up with all these unhappy masses of peeps.....life is good, all one needs for a new job and more income is a haircut - No?

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/06/30/1220134/-Cairo-Massive-doesn-t-do-it-justice

[unstuck]

oh look another 500 odd DFH's, this time in Cairo. Really I don't know whats up with all these unhappy masses of peeps.....life is good, all one needs for a new job and more income is a haircut - No?

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/06/30/1220134/-Cairo-Massive-doesn-t-do-it-justice

The worse it gets, the worse it gets. The better it gets, the better it gets. Depends on which end of the stick you are holding.:msn-wink:

[mashman]

LEARN TO SHARE AND COOPERATE AND THESE SORTS OF THINGS WON'T BE A CONSIDERATION (Britain 'under attack' in cyberspace)... fuckin idiots :facepalm:

[mashman]

House Of Lords To Get £100,000 New Toilets (http://uk.news.yahoo.com/house-lords-100-000-toilets-122032412.html#AJNT2VA)

"Taxpayers will fund a refurbishment of two toilets used by peers and VIP guests at the Palace of Westminster - at an "eye-watering" cost of up to £100,000."

"A family could afford to build themselves a home for this much cash,"

[mashman]

Impact of housing benefit changes 'worse than feared' (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23122369)

"The consequences of the housing benefit cut introduced in April are worse than feared, the National Housing Federation has said. "

"What we've seen are really bad effects on individuals, people whose lives have been turned upside down, who are very frightened about the future," says Mr Orr.

"The numbers of empty homes we've got to let are increasing significantly," says Iain Sim, chief executive of Coast and Country."

"The government announced that the parents of children in the military deployed on operations would be exempt from the cut. But Alison has been denied help by Middlesbrough Council because her sons' main residences are deemed to be their barracks in Germany and Cyprus."

"Also looking for a smaller property is Paul Wilson.

The 38-year-old has had his housing benefit cut by £11 per week since April but instead of going into debt, he's cut back on his outgoings, particularly energy and food.

"I now get by on one meal a day," he said. "

There's more in the article and it's a fuckin travesty. All for the sake of money.

[98tls]

Notice that Paul made no mention of his crack habit nor how it affects his ability to save.

[mashman]

Why Is the Obama Administration Suddenly So Interested in African Farms? (http://www.motherjones.com/blue-marble/2013/06/explainer-us-governments-push-bring-big-ag-africa)... when good intentions go bad... or prudent business strategy for the land grabbers?

"But Kenya was self-sufficient in milk well before agribusiness came onto the scene, according to a 2003 report by the UN's Food and Agriculture Organization. Moreover, the low-tech dairy industry provided income for an estimated 625,000 people. But by 2010, as production soared on the heels of new large-scale production, Kenya was overloaded with dairy. The price of milk dropped, and rather than sell their product at a loss, farmers began dumping it."

"But a glut in production was not the only problem for Kenya's small milk producers. In January 2013, Kenya banned the sale of raw milk, citing both safety concerns, and the need to protect the investments of large milk processors, according to media accounts. Far from supporting an existing (and functional) dairy industry, foreign agribusiness had only helped to undermine it."

"Wouldn't it be nice if we knew? Hans Herren, president of the Millennium Institute, argues that the world's farmers should focus less on growing more food, and more on growing higher quality food with fewer inputs, thereby enriching the soil instead of depleting it with chemicals. As Herren told my colleague Tom Philpott recently, in gross terms, the world already grows enough food today to feed the world two times over."

[mashman]

Notice that Paul made no mention of his crack habit nor how it affects his ability to save.

:girlfight:... what does being gay have to do with it? I'm guessing he isn't saving given that he's down to one meal a day. Still, could be worse, he could be getting fed 3 squares a day in jail and costing the tax payer a small fortune.

[blue rider]

:girlfight:... what does being gay have to do with it? I'm guessing he isn't saving given that he's down to one meal a day. Still, could be worse, he could be getting fed 3 squares a day in jail and costing the tax payer a small fortune.

yes, but it would get all those macho law abiding citizens a hard one. the only one they ever get.

[blue rider]

intersting and entertaining read

http://stream.wsj.com/story/latest-headlines/SS-2-63399/SS-2-266404/


The Lehman bankruptcy “has shown how this mechanism of over-the-counter negotiations of derivatives, and in particular credit default swaps, is capable of destabilizing the entire financial system,” EU antitrust chief Joaquín Almunia said Monday.

“[The banks] delayed the emergence of exchange trading of these financial products because they feared it would reduce their revenues,” Mr. Almunia said.

Mr. Almunia said the European Commission, the EU’s executive arm and antitrust enforcer, has sent preliminary charges to the banks related to their activities between 2006 and 2009. The banks will have the chance to dispute the charges if they are made final. EU rules allow antitrust fines of up to 10% of a firm’s annual revenue.

Exchange operators Deutsche Börse AG and the CME Group Inc. attempted to open the market during that time period but were foiled by the banks’ anticompetitive practices, Mr. Almunia said.

The banks charged are Merrill Lynch, now a unit of Bank of America Corp., Barclays PLC, J.P. Morgan Chase as well as the Bear Stearns operation it bought during the crisis, BNP Paribas SA, Citigroup Inc., Credit Suisse AG, Deutsche Bank, Goldman Sachs Group, HSBC Holdings PLC, Morgan Stanley, Royal Bank of Scotland Group PLC and UBS AG, the commission said. It also sent charges to the International Swaps and Derivatives Association, an industry group controlled by the banks, and Markit, a data provider owned by the banks.

All of the banks declined to comment.


How about prison time for these?

[mashman]

RUSSIA Suggests that WAR May Be Necessary To Stop MONSANTO (http://politicalblindspot.org/russia-suggests-that-war-may-be-necessary-to-stop-monsanto/)

"Important to note, this report says, is that Syngenta, along with bio-tech giants Monsanto, Bayer, Dow and DuPont, now control nearly 100% of the global market for genetically modified pesticides, plants and seeds.

Also to note about Syngenta, this report continues, is that in 2012 it was criminally charged in Germany for concealing the fact that its genetically modified corn killed cattle, and settled a class-action lawsuit in the US for $105 million after it was discovered they had contaminated the drinking supply of some 52 million Americans in more than 2,000 water districts with its “gender-bending” herbicide Atrazine."

[mashman]

A taxation alternative (http://www.economist.com/news/finance-and-economics/21580130-governments-should-make-more-use-property-taxes-levying-land?fsrc=scn/tw_ec/levying_the_land)... still ultimately flawed because it is going to "work" within the confines of a financial system.

[blue rider]

RUSSIA Suggests that WAR May Be Necessary To Stop MONSANTO (http://politicalblindspot.org/russia-suggests-that-war-may-be-necessary-to-stop-monsanto/)

"Important to note, this report says, is that Syngenta, along with bio-tech giants Monsanto, Bayer, Dow and DuPont, now control nearly 100% of the global market for genetically modified pesticides, plants and seeds.

Also to note about Syngenta, this report continues, is that in 2012 it was criminally charged in Germany for concealing the fact that its genetically modified corn killed cattle, and settled a class-action lawsuit in the US for $105 million after it was discovered they had contaminated the drinking supply of some 52 million Americans in more than 2,000 water districts with its “gender-bending” herbicide Atrazine."

the reason might be because of

Blackwater (then XE) now Blackwater again? Who keeps track

http://www.theglobaldispatch.com/monsanto-turns-to-blackwater-for-increased-security-intelligence-and-infiltrate-activist-groups-23474/

http://www.news24.com/MyNews24/The-Monsanto-Blackwater-Connection-20130528

http://english.ruvr.ru/news/2013_05_29/Monsanto-Blackwater-death-tech-firm-weds-hit-squad-8013/


a big agri business.....its good for us, move along nothing to see here....

[Ocean1]

A taxation alternative (http://www.economist.com/news/finance-and-economics/21580130-governments-should-make-more-use-property-taxes-levying-land?fsrc=scn/tw_ec/levying_the_land)... still ultimately flawed because it is going to "work" within the confines of a financial system.

Nothing new there, local govt is mostly funded from land taxes.

Don't think it's a starter as an alternative to income tax because it lacks the direct link to an ability to pay.

Also, I note that local govt isn't slow to fuck with rating formulas purely to maximise revenue with no relation whatsoever to services supplied.

[blue rider]

i like this one here, comes with a link to a handy pdf.....

waterfront property anyone.....million dollar batch.....lol

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/07/01-7


And these areas are unlikely to be the last that will experience such problems.

But in the UK hundreds of thousands of homeowners in areas at high risk of flooding will still be able to insure their properties, after the government struck a deal with the industry.

The deal – introduced as part of the government’s new Water Bill – comes just weeks before the current agreement is set to expire and follows lengthy negotiations with the Association of British Insurers.

The agreement will cap flood insurance premiums, linking them to council tax bands so that people in high risk areas will know the maximum they will have to pay, while a levy on all UK household insurers will be used to create a fund to cover claims for people in high-risk homes.

The new Bill also includes plans to increase competition in the water market and improve drought resilience. Meanwhile the government announced an extra £370 million of flood protection funding for 2015/16 and committed to increase funding each year to 2020 – adding to the £2.3 billion they say is currently earmarked for flood defences.

[mashman]

i like this one here, comes with a link to a handy pdf.....

waterfront property anyone.....million dollar batch.....lol

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/07/01-7

I remember that stuff happening back in the 80's. Insurance company's shouldn't be given a choice in regards to what they insure. If they insure a property it shouldn't be for all acts of nature.

[mashman]

Nothing new there, local govt is mostly funded from land taxes.

Don't think it's a starter as an alternative to income tax because it lacks the direct link to an ability to pay.

Also, I note that local govt isn't slow to fuck with rating formulas purely to maximise revenue with no relation whatsoever to services supplied.

Can you explain that a little further please?

No doubt that'll be offset with tax refunds or some such exclusions... perhaps a direct subsidy ;)

Dats coz it's land based and got nuffink to do with the improvements. Which kinda makes sense if it's an LVT. It's the exclusions/special circumstances I can't find answers for... and no doubt too many won't be happy at the thought of non-working people being given a dividend just for breathing.

[Ocean1]

Can you explain that a little further please?

Your rates are a form of land tax. The addition of "improvements" in the rules is one of the fuckings I mentioned, no point in extorting moneys from poor people is there?

Dunno what the rest of your shit is about.

[mashman]

Your rates are a form of land tax. The addition of "improvements" in the rules is one of the fuckings I mentioned, no point in extorting moneys from poor people is there?

Dunno what the rest of your shit is about.

I suggest you read up on the LVT system they're talking about... as it seems to bare little to no resemblance to what you're expecting and it may also help clear up the rest of my shit.

[mashman]

Farming subsidies: this is the most blatant transfer of cash to the rich (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jul/01/farm-subsidies-blatant-transfer-of-cash-to-rich?CMP=twt_gu)... we don't have them here do we?

[Ocean1]

I suggest you read up on the LVT system they're talking about... as it seems to bare little to no resemblance to what you're expecting and it may also help clear up the rest of my shit.

I did. They even mentioned local govt was funded like that in Anglo Saxon countries. So if you can't see the similarity then at least the authors you referenced do.

As for what I expect: I expect that every entity given the power to take money from people will rapidly turn into parasites, tuning the mechanism of their authority to extract the most from their victims and providing minimal return for the trouble. That expectation's based on decades of experience with the fuckers, and I can count on the fingers of my left foot the number of times I've gotten value for money out of any of them.

[mashman]

I did. They even mentioned local govt was funded like that in Anglo Saxon countries. So if you can't see the similarity then at least the authors you referenced do.

As for what I expect: I expect that every entity given the power to take money from people will rapidly turn into parasites, tuning the mechanism of their authority to extract the most from their victims and providing minimal return for the trouble. That expectation's based on decades of experience with the fuckers, and I can count on the fingers of my left foot the number of times I've gotten value for money out of any of them.

My bad... I've been doin a little reading about LVT's lately and skimmed the article believing it would be similar. The LVT that I've been reading about one that doesn't care about the property/industry/usage of the land, it's just taxed on its value. A dividend (a la Social Credit) is paid to the country's citizens as they are technically the shareholders of the land. Oddly enough it seems like the usual shifting of the chairs on deck whilst the ship sinks. But hey.

I gotta say that's awful similar to the way I see things... however I'd rather just give them what they need (no money etc...) so that it doesn't constrain the country financially, stopping important things from coming in to being.

[mashman]

Demand for food banks ‘has nothing to do with benefits squeeze,’ says Lord Freud (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/demand-for-food-banks-has-nothing-to-do-with-benefits-squeeze-says-lord-freud-8684005.html)... Some people just don't have a clue... and unfortunately most of them are running their country's.

[Ocean1]

Demand for food banks ‘has nothing to do with benefits squeeze,’ says Lord Freud (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/demand-for-food-banks-has-nothing-to-do-with-benefits-squeeze-says-lord-freud-8684005.html)... Some people just don't have a clue... and unfortunately most of them are running their country's.

He's perfectly correct. Food banks are no part of the govt's benefit system. He's also perfectly correct about the market truism that any goods made available free will produce an exponentially growing market.

I presume you simply meant to bleat about the fact that more people want more free resources now than did a few years ago, in spite of the benefit overspend of some 20 billion pounds.

Meh.

[gwigs]

Demand for food banks ‘has nothing to do with benefits squeeze,’ says Lord Freud (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/demand-for-food-banks-has-nothing-to-do-with-benefits-squeeze-says-lord-freud-8684005.html)... Some people just don't have a clue... and unfortunately most of them are running their country's.

He should enter..

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

[avgas]

Demand for food banks ‘has nothing to do with benefits squeeze,’ says Lord Freud (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/demand-for-food-banks-has-nothing-to-do-with-benefits-squeeze-says-lord-freud-8684005.html)... Some people just don't have a clue... and unfortunately most of them are running their country's.
Why can't we just collect up all the very poor. Take them out to a farm.....y'no and just let them run around and be free.

[Scuba_Steve]

Why can't we just collect up all the very poor. Take them out to a farm.....y'no and just let them run around and be free.

because then control over them is lost, you can't oppress the free

[mashman]

He's perfectly correct. Food banks are no part of the govt's benefit system. He's also perfectly correct about the market truism that any goods made available free will produce an exponentially growing market.

I presume you simply meant to bleat about the fact that more people want more free resources now than did a few years ago, in spite of the benefit overspend of some 20 billion pounds.

Meh.

He's partially correct... what you and he ignore is that the increase in numbers will likely be people who once worked for a living and were more than likely very decent people. The supply has always been there, yet the demand hasn't. So what changed? The demand. And if the supply has always been there with a "steady" increase in demand, then where has this extra demand come from? There's something to be said for ignoring that which does not fit your world view... blinkered!

Man how I :rofl:@overspend. There's a fuckload of people that are needing fed, housed, need to pay bills etc... having been booted out of work, which as I'm sure you'll have figured out means that less tax $ will be being collected. How much of that 20billion do ya reckon is failed govt pension investment? Or would you say that it was just the unemployed (my money is on private landlords raising rents), say at 50k per year per that have caused the blowout? coz that's 400,000 people and given that the benefits are supposed to be approx 15k, you're gonna have to treble that number.


Why can't we just collect up all the very poor. Take them out to a farm.....y'no and just let them run around and be free.

Just in case Obama sends in the drones.

[Ocean1]

He's partially correct... what you and he ignore is that the increase in numbers will likely be people who once worked for a living and were more than likely very decent people. The supply has always been there, yet the demand hasn't. So what changed? The demand. And if the supply has always been there with a "steady" increase in demand, then where has this extra demand come from? There's something to be said for ignoring that which does not fit your world view... blinkered!

Of course demand is up, nobody denied it. But whereas you, like most of your left-leaning mates blame everyone indiscriminately for it he simply pointed out that availability of every free resource will always be outstripped by demand.


Man how I :rofl:@overspend. There's a fuckload of people that are needing fed, housed, need to pay bills etc... having been booted out of work, which as I'm sure you'll have figured out means that less tax $ will be being collected. How much of that 20billion do ya reckon is failed govt pension investment? Or would you say that it was just the unemployed (my money is on private landlords raising rents), say at 50k per year per that have caused the blowout? coz that's 400,000 people and given that the benefits are supposed to be approx 15k, you're gonna have to treble that number.


No idea how much extra is spent on unemployment, but as you point out whatever it is it's more than was previously spent, at a time when there's less tax revenue to pay for it. If you were serious about finding the root cause of that problem you'd be finding those numbers rather than continually pointing the finger at pretty much everyone else for failing to provide yet more free resources for yet more demand to mop up.

[mashman]

Of course demand is up, nobody denied it. But whereas you, like most of your left-leaning mates blame everyone indiscriminately for it he simply pointed out that availability of every free resource will always be outstripped by demand.

No idea how much extra is spent on unemployment, but as you point out whatever it is it's more than was previously spent, at a time when there's less tax revenue to pay for it. If you were serious about finding the root cause of that problem you'd be finding those numbers rather than continually pointing the finger at pretty much everyone else for failing to provide yet more free resources for yet more demand to mop up.

Pffft... dunno about the lefty types, but yeah, I blame everyone indiscriminately because it is everyone's issue and yet very few do anything about it. Bwaaaaaaaa ha ha ha ha ha ha haaaaaaa... so him questioning whether the benefits cuts have anything to do with the boom in food bank customers is him saying that as long as there's a freebee, people will take it :facepalm:. Nothing new there, likely a fair chunk of affluent people claim everything they can off of the state. There is no question about the link between the two, there is most definitely a cause... unless one prefers to ignore the last 6 years as being of no consequence to the lives of any person.

I've found the root cause. Again, it's completely undeniable, although you are trying... money dear boy, money. Does a career thief keep on thieving if they come into money? No, because they have enough money to do them until they don't. MONEY. Geddit yet :rofl:

[Ocean1]

Does a career thief keep on thieving if they come into money? No, because they have enough money to do them until they don't. MONEY. Geddit yet :rofl:

Actually, they do. In fact thieves show the lie to your brainless no-money "idea", when there's no money to thieve they take anything else they fancy. People don't change, poor people win lotteries and they're poor again a few years later, rich people lose the lot and sooner or later they're rich again.

So yes, the problem is money: specifically the soup kitchen clients aren't earning any. And whether you like to admit it or not it's a fact that the rest of the country is helping them. As they will continue to do, as far and as long as they can afford to, charity isn't a bottomless pit of resources.

[mashman]

Actually, they do. In fact thieves show the lie to your brainless no-money "idea", when there's no money to thieve they take anything else they fancy. People don't change, poor people win lotteries and they're poor again a few years later, rich people lose the lot and sooner or later they're rich again.

So yes, the problem is money: specifically the soup kitchen clients aren't earning any. And whether you like to admit it or not it's a fact that the rest of the country is helping them. As they will continue to do, as far and as long as they can afford to, charity isn't a bottomless pit of resources.

Aha :yawn:

Savage.

Meanwhile in other news...

Police seize possessions of rough sleepers in crackdown on homelessness (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/police-seize-possessions-of-rough-sleepers-in-crackdown-on-homelessness-8631665.html)... FFS what does that achieve? Bunch of ignorant fuckwits.

[gwigs]

Aha :yawn:

Savage.

Meanwhile in other news...

Police seize possessions of rough sleepers in crackdown on homelessness (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/police-seize-possessions-of-rough-sleepers-in-crackdown-on-homelessness-8631665.html)... FFS what does that achieve? Bunch of ignorant fuckwits.

Thats it put the boot in..Dirty Filthy Homeless Scum..we cant have them upsetting the nice people who have money and somewhere
nice to live can we ?Why not just exterminate them it would be kinder....

Fuck man what a bunch of sick cunts ....:angry2:

[scissorhands]

Thats it put the boot in..Dirty Filthy Homeless Scum..we cant have them upsetting the nice people who have money and somewhere
nice to live can we ?Why not just exterminate them it would be kinder....

Fuck man what a bunch of sick cunts ....:angry2:

The sad part is these people are isolated and lonely off the street.

The street is their only socialisation. All they got to look forward to are empty rooms

Their homes are their prisons.

At the same time.... living on the street is unhealthy for them as they smoke tobacco eat junk and ingest fumes and dirt.....

In Thailand monasteries house these people, they beg for food only, at a certain time and place....

[blue rider]

how about people only had children that they could afford


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/10161087/MPs-use-children-to-claim-more-expenses.html

[blue rider]

Aha :yawn:

Savage.

Meanwhile in other news...

Police seize possessions of rough sleepers in crackdown on homelessness (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/police-seize-possessions-of-rough-sleepers-in-crackdown-on-homelessness-8631665.html)... FFS what does that achieve? Bunch of ignorant fuckwits.

look, there is business to be made, prison for profit needs inmates.....homeless people are a good start.
First make it illegal to spend more than 10 minutes on a parking bench or else be charged for loitering. - 30 days?
Make it illegal to build a shelter under a bridge (security) call it loitering - 60 days?
Make it illegal to beg (unless they apply for a non profit status or claim to raise fund for jeeeebuuuuus) - 90 days
make it illegal to not be dressed a certain standard - offending the public - 90 days
make it illegal to be smelly and unwashed (while closing down all the public bathhouses) - offending the public - 90 days
if caught in the same place twice within a two weeks period - repeat offender - 2 years without parole
if caught in the same place a third time - three strikes - prison for ever without parole

the CEO of the company running the private business is going to be laughing all the way to the bank, while the good fearing macho conservatives will whine about the tax they have to pay, all they while requesting small government that is only large enough to control those that are not them.

We also could just shoot this human waste and scum, but who would want to be the executioner and how many a day could be shot.
And than you have the issue with the burials....they cost money too, unless one is just dumping them in the oceans.

This planet is screwed, because so many people believe they are above all of these things, and that shit will never happen to them, and if it does they will be better than all the others.
Yeah, sure Tui.

[unstuck]

Their minds are their prisons.

Fixed that for ya.:niceone:

What the Mind Can Conceive and Believe it Can Achieve.......Napoleon Hill. :msn-wink:

[Scuba_Steve]

Aha :yawn:

Savage.

Meanwhile in other news...

Police seize possessions of rough sleepers in crackdown on homelessness (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/police-seize-possessions-of-rough-sleepers-in-crackdown-on-homelessness-8631665.html)... FFS what does that achieve? Bunch of ignorant fuckwits.

We used to have a law which stated something like anyone with less than 3 pounds (money) on their person could be jailed immediately, it was used to "clean up" the streets of the homeless for when the Queen came

[gwigs]

MPs being forced into luxury..



http://newsthump.com/2013/07/01/mps-being-forced-into-luxury/

[mashman]

The world is changing? Or are the chairs merely being moved?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mOwZwkhFemQ

[mashman]

Why?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=kgo8MuszjlE

[mashman]

NZ Productivity Commission to look at regulatory regimes (http://nz.finance.yahoo.com/news/nz-productivity-commission-look-regulatory-041900661.html)

"This is the entity's sixth inquiry since it was set up in 2011 as part of an election deal between the National and Act parties, and modelled closely on its Australian counterpart.

The terms of reference seek recommendations to "improve the design of new regulatory regimes and make system-wide improvements to the operation of existing regulatory regimes in New Zealand."

A final report is due to the ministers by the end of June next year."

:rofl: so did they get it wrong 5 times? Perhaps they didn't have long enough to figure out what they seem not to have a clue about and that's why they'll be waiting 11 months for an answer this time around.

[Ocean1]

NZ Productivity Commission to look at regulatory regimes (http://nz.finance.yahoo.com/news/nz-productivity-commission-look-regulatory-041900661.html)

"This is the entity's sixth inquiry since it was set up in 2011 as part of an election deal between the National and Act parties, and modelled closely on its Australian counterpart.

The terms of reference seek recommendations to "improve the design of new regulatory regimes and make system-wide improvements to the operation of existing regulatory regimes in New Zealand."

A final report is due to the ministers by the end of June next year."

:rofl: so did they get it wrong 5 times? Perhaps they didn't have long enough to figure out what they seem not to have a clue about and that's why they'll be waiting 11 months for an answer this time around.

It's terms of reference were limited to a single report? I don't understand why you have a problem with almost everything about our regulatory systems and yet you also apparently have a problem with an entity seeking to improve them. Especially as you don't have a clue about any changes they may have recommended. And in fact no clue about how regulatory systems are supposed to work in the first place.

[mashman]

It's terms of reference were limited to a single report? I don't understand why you have a problem with almost everything about our regulatory systems and yet you also apparently have a problem with an entity seeking to improve them. Especially as you don't have a clue about any changes they may have recommended. And in fact no clue about how regulatory systems are supposed to work in the first place.

The problem I have is that they don't seem to know what they're looking for or are doing, else why would you need 6 reports? If I was being nice I would assume that the first 5 were requirements gathering escapades. This is the reason we have a govt. To do these things for us. Not to seek very expensive advice every 5 minutes and outsource to the highest bidder and pull in whoever fits the bill. Regulatory systems are bullshit! Believing that commerce will be reigned in by rules and regulation is like hoping that the guy who's head you just shot off with a 12 guage is still going to be ok. Waste of time and energy, not to mention money. That's why I have the problem, or at least one of the reasons.

[Oscar]

The problem I have is that they don't seem to know what they're looking for or are doing, else why would you need 6 reports? If I was being nice I would assume that the first 5 were requirements gathering escapades. This is the reason we have a govt. To do these things for us. Not to seek very expensive advice every 5 minutes and outsource to the highest bidder and pull in whoever fits the bill. Regulatory systems are bullshit! Believing that commerce will be reigned in by rules and regulation is like hoping that the guy who's head you just shot off with a 12 guage is still going to be ok. Waste of time and energy, not to mention money. That's why I have the problem, or at least one of the reasons.

You assume?
Have you seen any off them?

You crap on about things you have no knowledge of.
You really don't have to keep proving that you're a childish wanker, we get it...

[mashman]

You assume?
Have you seen any off them?

You crap on about things you have no knowledge of.
You really don't have to keep proving that you're a childish wanker, we get it...

Yes I assume.
Any of What?

Knowledge of what?
Of course I do, coz you don't.

[Oscar]

Yes I assume.
Any of What?

Knowledge of what?
Of course I do, coz you don't.

And what does that mean?
Yes, I have read the five regulatory reviews, so I know of what I speak?
Or, more likely, that you like airing your half baked views on this forum.

So tell us - what types of regulatory reform are you in favour of?
What aspects of regulatory reform are being reviewed?

You haven't got a fucking clue, have you?

[mashman]

And what does that mean?
Yes, I have read the five regulatory reviews, so I know of what I speak?
Or, more likely, that you like airing your half baked views on this forum.

So tell us - what types of regulatory reform are you in favour of?
What aspects of regulatory reform are being reviewed?

You haven't got a fucking clue, have you?

What does what mean?
And that means what?

None of it is required. Tis just written wank for weak minded fools to follow. You prove the case well.

[Oscar]

What does what mean?
And that means what?

None of it is required. Tis just written wank for weak minded fools to follow. You prove the case well.

So you have nothing to add to your initial, childish and weak blertings?
You should stop commenting on subjects that you are ignorant of.

[mashman]

So you have nothing to add to your initial, childish and weak blertings?
You should stop commenting on subjects that you are ignorant of.

As should you.

[Oscar]

As should you.

The irony here is that the regulatory review affects some of your favourite subjects, but you're too stupid to realise it.

[mashman]

The irony here is that the regulatory review affects some of your favourite subjects, but you're too stupid to realise it.

Probably because I haven't read them... nothing to do with my stupidity in this case.

So what's it all about Alfie? Why so many reviews?

[Oscar]

Probably because I haven't read them... nothing to do with my stupidity in this case.

So what's it all about Alfie? Why so many reviews?

So you're saying that you know absolutely nothing about what this body does, but you're prepared to slag it off?
You don't know what it does but you don't think it should do it six times?
Sounds like everything to do with stupidity in your case.

[carbonhed]

So you're saying that you know absolutely nothing about what this body does, but you're prepared to slag it off?
You don't know what it does but you don't think it should do it six times?
Sounds like everything to do with stupidity in your case.

Have you know you're dealing with the "idiot savant" of stupid here... heavy on the idiot.

[mashman]

So you're saying that you know absolutely nothing about what this body does, but you're prepared to slag it off?
You don't know what it does but you don't think it should do it six times?
Sounds like everything to do with stupidity in your case.

So as per, you've got nothing. No evidence of any knowledge other than your claims.


Have you know you're dealing with the "idiot savant" of stupid here... heavy on the idiot.

:yawn:

[Oscar]

So as per, you've got nothing. No evidence of any knowledge other than your claims.



:yawn:

My claims?

Where did I "claim" anything?
I merely replied to your post and asked if you had any idea what you speaking of.

You are currently engaged in the internet equivalent of standing on your own tongue...

[mashman]

Not generation ME... but but but. (http://nz.finance.yahoo.com/news/anything-great-recession-best-thing-211847863.html)