Wealthy more likely to lie or cheat

[mashman]

Quelle Surprise (http://finance.yahoo.com/news/wealthy-more-likely-lie-cheat-200339245.html)

"One experiment invited 195 adults recruited using Craigslist to play a game in which a computer "rolled dice" for a chance to win a $50 gift certificate. The numbers each participant rolled were the same; anyone self reporting a total higher than 12 was lying about their score. Those in wealthier classes were found to be more likely to fib, Piff said."

"Poorer participants may be less likely to cheat because they must rely more on their community to get by, and thus are more likely adhere to community standards, Piff suggested. By comparison, "upper-class individuals are more self-focused, they privilege themselves over others, and they engage in self- interested patterns of behavior," he said in a telephone interview."

And it shows... pathetic little worms.

[scissorhands]

Groan. Hating on the rich now and found some evidence online huh?

Pathetic little worms?

really?

[mashman]

Groan. Hating on the rich now and found some evidence online huh?

Pathetic little worms?

really?

Hating?

Some of them are very much so.

Yes.

[MIXONE]

Surely it comes as no suprise.They lie and cheat to get wealthy.

[SMOKEU]

They lie and cheat to get wealthy.

That pretty much describes jews and politicians.

[mashman]

Surely it comes as no suprise.They lie and cheat to get wealthy.

I agree, hence the Quelle Surprise bit... No they don't, they work hard and are exceptionally successful business people... HATER!

[schrodingers cat]

Breaking news: Inflamatory post attracts lunatic fringe

[mashman]

Breaking news: Inflamatory post attracts lunatic fringe

nothing wrong with a little bit of reality.

[scissorhands]

Yeah, ALL richies are ALL pricks, even some mates I know who gave heaps to tsunami ravaged Sumatra, even going over there. Ed Hillary stuff, yet they may qualify for your genocidal ethnic purge? Its a two way street bro

yo reality

[TrentNz]

I swear the only threads you make are ones about news lol

[mashman]

Yeah, ALL richies are ALL pricks, even some mates I know who gave heaps to tsunami ravaged Sumatra, even going over there. Ed Hillary stuff, yet they may qualify for your genocidal ethnic purge? Its a two way street bro

yo reality

I never said ALL. Genocidal ethnic purge :rofl:? Haters just gonna hate eh?

[mashman]

I swear the only threads you make are ones about news lol

It's where most of the humour is. Purely self-indulgent humour :yes:

[puddytat]

Isnt Craiglist American?

[mashman]

Isnt Craiglist American?

heh, the home of some of the strangest listings on the planet.

[puddytat]

just wondering on the demographic 'sall....

Nice to see a poll confirming something Ive known since ages ago...but of course Im generalising.

Hmmmm Lunatic Fringe....? Could be the name for a new users group Bro.....

[mashman]

just wondering on the demographic 'sall....

Nice to see a poll confirming something Ive known since ages ago...but of course Im generalising.

Hmmmm Lunatic Fringe....? Could be the name for a new users group Bro.....

I couldn't get passed 195 people without sniggering. However if you extrapolate the results in regard to the population of the country, there'd be about 122 of them :innocent:

heh heh... love the name. Lunatic Aware Revolutionary Fringe, or LARF for short :)

[Brian d marge]

John key...............

case closed


Stephen

[oneofsix]

John key...............

case closed


Stephen

But now he is a politician he is at least being honest about his lieing :facepalm:

Sir Michael Fay.

[mashman]

SCF, Blue Chip, Lombard, Banks (tax dodging), Hanover etc... it's not the institution that fails, it's the people driving it... but at least they were successful at it and have nice bank balances.

[scissorhands]

'You have to protect yourself here, don’t you? If you accept that the vast majority of those you call “rich” got there through hard work, then don’t you have to ask yourself why you’re not one of them?

It’s just so much easier to cast them as callous, selfish monsters and evil exploiters of the working class while preserving the mantle of goodness and righteousness for yourself. Hey, you may be poor, but at least you’re a nice person, right?'



I worked in the mines and saved everything I made. I now have a passive income from rents, that I have lived on for 2 decades now, I turn 50 soon. I started with nothing, and gave up pleasures to rise above the herd

At a club recently I discussed 'succeeder's' with some bikers..... most socialists I met at occupy auckland were bitter, often retarded or with mild pervasive developement disorder......unable to compete with the vast majority of more successful genotypes in generic NZ man

'Succeeder's' should not be dragged down with psychopaths as Mashmans rebel rousing rhetoric implies? Many psychopaths exist in all wealth spectrum's... and as such your arguement is only partly true, yet you extrapolate for your ego's survival and denial....

A psychopath with money has influence, whereas a psychopath without money is much less influential.... except those in emotional contact with vulnerable others:baby:

Charlatans generally get caught or karma screws their asses big time, vulnerable idiots and those too trusting and conditioned to obey:motu: eventual wise up and the worm turns

Its a cycle like the weather.... cold air moves up, then to fill the void the warm air moves down.... and around and around we go:yawn:

I agree that certain wealthy psychopaths need a bullet, but do not group succeeders with them, or you yourself must stay poor to keep god in your pocket full of holes.............

[avgas]

Gareth Morgan

[mashman]

Well it was fun whilst it lasted. Thanks for the laughs, it's been much appreciated as people have scrambled around deciding what my motivation and political pursuasions are... pinko socialist hippy tree hugging raving psychotic commy red leftist hater springing to mind, but certainly not limited to.

My motivation. One day you wake up, not sure what sparked it, coulda been a simple thought that grew into something entirely different, coulda been a combination of things that were going on in my life at the time. I'll say that the ACC thing really kicked it into gear though, cheers Nick you fucked up freak of nature.

Anyhoo. One day you wake up and realise that we really are doing things badly wrong to an extent that it drives MASSIVE wedges into society, leaves people hungry, homeless etc... The "hate" went a long time ago and these days it manifests itself as disappointment and despair, but more often than not it leaves me roaring with laughter, else I think I would go completely insane.

I'm see measuring success using $ and the damage that that success causes as a massive problem given the issues we have, in fact it's the root cause without exception. Granted in the context of the way things currently work that success seems completely acceptable to most. It doesn't to me. Where financial success makes someone richer, given every $1 million and an average wage of 50k, it makes 20 people poorer, in fact in that example it puts 20 people on the dole. The average wage - bullshit calculation where 1 person earning $1 million offsets 40 people earning 30k to give an avg wage of 50k+, so everything looks rosy, :killingme :facepalm:. Now look at that in the context of a country and you may get some idea of where I'm coming from.

Whilst success is fantastic and wonderful, it takes a finite amount of money available in NZ away from 40 people per $1 million owned by any individual... hilarious when you consider that money is plucked out of thin air and yet really really not funny at all... and to add insult to injury those who can't/won't work whatever get kicked and labelled as the problem where the country requires unemployment to offset inflation (yes yes yes, not limited to unemployment, but it's up there as the main mechanism). The problem is mathematical, not personal. That sounds oddly familiar and people and the environment suffer as a result.

We charge people for using products and resources wholly made in NZ, where the only claim to those resources are pieces of paper that our elected officials offer in return for, hmmmmm, in return for creating jobs let's say :rofl:... The resources owned by the govt are actually owned by you and me, so we're paying someone to set up a company to use the resources on our behalf, whilst charging us for those resources. Some people become financially successful off the back of this and I :rofl: and :rofl: when I look at that system and where the resources come from.

There are hundreds of reasons for my "disposition", I could go on, but won't...

To that end, rinse and repeat and we have society in a nut shell. If you've wanted to pay attention, you'll understand where I'm coming from without me having to type another word (it's not a hard thing to grasp), you may even decide to give it some thought someday :eek5:... however I highly doubt that you want to understand my motivation as Haters are just gonna Hate, right?

But please please please carry on believing that you know better, I could do with the laughs.

Have a nice day :motu:

[Big Dave]

I could do with the laughs.

Seems only fair as you provide so many.

[scissorhands]

Well it was fun whilst it lasted. Thanks for the laughs, it's been much appreciated as people have scrambled around deciding what my motivation and political pursuasions are... pinko socialist hippy tree hugging raving psychotic commy red leftist hater springing to mind..............

...............Have a nice day :motu:

Its you who started it by stating the wealthy were pathetic little worms?

Society will always have some who are driven to accumulate more wealth than they will ever need. I retired in my mid 20's as I realised you cant take it with you. I worked hard to make up for an inability to sit about and make small talk with others, or socialise and communicate in the same manner as society sees fit.........

I dreamt of manufacturing in Asia, preferably Taiwan the scooter (and bicycle) building capital of the world, but I am restricted by autism and lack of family support in my life. I would have been worth 100's of mill$$ if all went to plan....

When I drive or shop or whatever....I maximise all situations to my advantage, and generally find opportunities where others dont

ADHD offer evolutionary success, through the mechanisms of the dark triad, think Steve Jobs and his untimely demise. ASD ers like Buffet and Gates achieve via a Chinese like work ethic and intelligence, very different from the dark triad..........they will die happy old men

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/mar/05/nice-girls-bad-boys

From a nice girl, aged 37
Dear Carole, Why do girls – even nice girls – fall for bad boys, even when the girls in question are 37 and should know much better? My friends and I don't understand ourselves.
Ask Carole: Chimpanzee wearing spectacles

Carole replies:
The "dark triad" of human behaviour consists of narcissism (or self-obsession), psychopathy (including callous, impulsive, thrill-seeking, risk-taking behaviour) and Machiavellianism (exploitative, manipulative and deceitful behaviour). Bad boys exhibit dark triad traits and their behaviour, according to one theory, is genetic, meaning they are unlikely to change their ways.

These types of males tend to favour short-term relationships (including one night stands) over long-term relationships. They also attempt to compete with other males by poaching mates for brief affairs.

Research has shown that a touch of evil can bring fitness benefits: these males tend to have more female partners and thus more reproductive opportunities than other males. The fictional character of James Bond is frequently cited as possessing dark triad traits.

Although the dark triad personality type appears to be universal in human society, having been identified in 57 countries, it does exact real costs – otherwise bad boys would be more common. Those exhibiting dark triad behaviour need to prey on the cooperative and unsuspecting.

If bad boys stay in one place and among the same group of humans for too long their psychopathy will be exposed. It has been predicted that this evolutionary strategy can only succeed if bad boys manage to achieve anonymity or lead an itinerant lifestyle.

Evolutionary-anthropological research on hunter gatherers, such as the !Kung San of the Kalahari, has shown that successful, risk-taking hunters – who "bring home the bacon" for the group – get the most mating opportunities.

As a single trait, successful risk-taking is universally appreciated as a sign of good genes. The combination of brave, risk-taking behaviour is frequently attractive to females in the short-term. But in the long term, although females remain attracted to bravery and risk-taking they also look for the crucial additional trait of altruism.

Thus, if given a choice, a female will apparently favour a brave altruist over an opportunistic risk-taker.

Ironically, "nice girls" may be the only females who tolerate the dark triad male personality, forgiving these naughty boys and inadvertently giving them yet another chance to misbehave.

Are you prepared to be a single mother? A bad boy son who survives all the risk-taking behaviour to reach reproductive age may make you a granny many times over, but are you really looking for quantity over quality?

You need to ask yourself this: "Do I want to be another notch on this man's bedpost, or would it be wiser to hold out for a brave altruist?"



By this article, the placated 'nice' people high on dope and religion, are also the problem.... the nice people allow the bad to become bad through naivety and 'niceness'

Police create outlaw bikers, outlaw bikers create police
Nice people create devious scammers, devious scammers create nice people

The duality of opposites means black needs white to be black, white needs black to be white, and opponents depend on far spectrum polarised others to galvanise their own position

Just like god needs the devil.......

I think your frantic angry postings(last night you had the last word on 6 separate threads) could be mellowed with acceptance of the beast in your garden of earthly delights.

Even if you killed them all, a successful mutation would appear and man's genepool will again have wolves amongst the sheep. Things happen while they can.....

The flock or herd of good people in the world have strength in numbers for sure, but they frighten easily and being of peaceful disposition, their placidity can be their downfall. Rise up, rise up you chant... I dont know if this vid is a good analogy or not

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LU8DDYz68kM but its had 65mill hits so its a good watch anyway

Anyways,:beer: the utopian equal world you dream about for yourself and others, has been postulated for thousands of years.

If you check out the watchtower, the lion will lay down with the lamb!:killingme

[superman]

Surely it comes as no suprise.They lie and cheat to get wealthy.

If all it took was lying and cheating then a whole lot more people would be wealthy... :brick:

[avgas]

Please guys, keep the posts small here. Ok?
Some of us here are trying not to read.

If you can't explain it via simple graphic I can not be bothered.
http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l215/bleyd_1138/webphotos/robot-chicken-stupid-monkey-Stoop_d.jpghttp://thethinkerblog.com/images/mommy_share_our_toys.jpghttp://vivirlatino.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/no-exit-libertarianism-anarchy-for-rich-people-238x300.GIF

[schrodingers cat]

nothing wrong with a little bit of reality.


Talking about post #5...

[James Deuce]

Anarchy is simply the absence of Government, it isn't "punk", nor is it about dilletante 3rd sons hurling bombs in the 1930s.

In support of the original premise I'd say that I agree on the whole. That sort of behaviour is rewarded more often than not, and poor people remain poor not because of any idealised sense of community, but simply because their local economy doesn't encourage them to climb over corpses to get to the top of their local tree, thereby enhancing the view of neighbouring trees ripe for a take over.

There's too much semantic waffling about the nobility of hard work and the "evil" of its polar opposite; welfare dependency.

Likewise, a certain type likes to hold the working man up as all that is noble (including whne ensconced comfortably is his non-working state) and the evil of capitalism.

The truth is somewhat simpler. There have always been, and always will be people who will use an economic, political, or military system to garner whatever advantage they can for themselves and those they hold dearest. On the other hand the vast majority of people simply don't have the energy to be anything except "victims" of those systems and will live within those systems right up until the point people start disappearing in large numbers and floating to the surface when the gas of decay creates enough positive buoyancy to overwhelm the carpet and chains. Then some other person with essentially the same ethics will institute another system in which people will rejoice.

There are always people who rise to the top, make a fortune and then appear to give back a substantial amount. The cynic in me insists that these people often do this from a very deep and unacknowledged sense of guilt about the ladder of mostly virtual corpses they created to get to the top. Motivation will of course be both simpler and more complex than that. But that's cool, because I have an ugly brain. The cynic also says that it is unlikely that the givers back will ever go short. But that's cool too. It's a great survival strategy.

[Ocean1]

Anarchy is simply the absence of Government, <snip>
The cynic also says that it is unlikely that the givers back will ever go short. But that's cool too. It's a great survival strategy.

"The basis of all morality is duty, a concept with the same relation to society that self-interest has to the individual".

Can't remember, gotta gp with "Anon".



Oh, and "duty"? That which is owed.

[mashman]

your post

People will read me how they read me, I have no control over that. As for utopia, I realise that that's no attainable, depending on your version of utopia. I wholly believe (misguided or not) that man can live with man on a basis other than financial, and that man would be better off for it. If the truth sounds angry, then that's how you read me (not saying I've never posted angry posts, but there are next to none these days... even though that assurance will undoubtedly fall upon deaf eyes.). As for my angry frantic postings where I've had the last word (other than going to bed later than some), it would seem that those threads have continued in my absence, how dare they :innocent:. Congratulations on your triumphs (sincerely :yes:, just in case you doubt my words).

[mashman]

There are always people who rise to the top, make a fortune and then appear to give back a substantial amount. The cynic in me insists that these people often do this from a very deep and unacknowledged sense of guilt about the ladder of mostly virtual corpses they created to get to the top. Motivation will of course be both simpler and more complex than that. But that's cool, because I have an ugly brain. The cynic also says that it is unlikely that the givers back will ever go short. But that's cool too. It's a great survival strategy.

According to should be Mr richy rich and all round exceptionally good cunt that shared beer o'clock with me tonight, he says he got to a point where he started to feel that everyone else was dragging their heels and that he was "entitled" to what he had earned and that the corpses deserved their place. He says it scared the shit out of him that he could feel that way. Not so much guilt (although he has tried to make "amends"), but certainly a concern for his fellow man that were/are less fortunate/skilful/able/willing etc... than he was/is.

[Brian d marge]

"The basis of all morality is duty, a concept with the same relation to society that self-interest has to the individual".

Can't remember, gotta gp with "Anon".



Oh, and "duty"? That which is owed.


A Famous Froggy said "
Finally, each man, in giving himself to all, gives himself to nobody; and as there is no associate over whom he does not acquire the same right as he yields others over himself, he gains an equivalent for everything he loses, and an increase of force for the preservation of what he has.
If then we discard from the social compact what is not of its essence, we shall find that it reduces itself to the following terms:
"Each of us puts his person and all his power in common under the supreme direction of the general will, and, in our corporate capacity, we receive each member as an indivisible part of the whole."


one of the few froggys I like ....

Monsieur Stephan

[scissorhands]

No bodies with Gareth Morgan, and none with me. Far more bodies and carnage with psychopathic poor.....than altruistic wealthy.

The marking stick here for human suffering caused by self interest is: psychopathy and not singularly wealth.
We look up to the wealthy for favours..... the masses are kinda like Maoris diving underwater for coins under a bridge in Rotorua.

If the Mr and Mrs Richy up high looks down at us swimming below... with our childlike benevolent smile of need, and no coin is tossed, he is then not a good honky.

I would suggest that Mashmans interest may be similar to thugs joining in The Springbok riots..... in no way are their lives pure and good or even non racist........ yet they fight for purity in others who are in the public domain and under constant scrutiny....

The ratio may be almost identical....
of altruistic wealthy vrs psychopathic wealthy
and altruistic protesters vrs psychopathic protesters

Until purity can be shown by your detractors, why would you change your bad ways for those who have a log in their own eye??

After immersing myself to the Occupy Auckland movement and its members, I found only partial moral high ground amongst them, maybe 10-20%


prolly the same as with the wealthy that they hate:wacko:



Many wealthy look down upon the masses, like NZ white working/middle classes look down unfairly on Maori with their hand out, who then, due to the domino effect, disparage those beneath them.............................................d ogs, children, immigrants

Some moral relativity instead of rich hating please Mr Schoolteacher....

....... your charge upon the castle will require some more rebel rousing, maybe add some alcohol?

The uber wealthy are addicted to money highs, others settle for riding bikes, grog and church, some like weed

..........I have been kicked by the rich psychopaths many many many times......... I should be a hater too...... but strangely I'm not........maybe I should throw stones at them too, maybe one day I will too

[oneofsix]

No bodies with Gareth Morgan, and none with me. Far more bodies and carnage with psychopathic poor.....than altruistic wealthy.

The marking stick here for human suffering caused by self interest is: psychopathy and not singularly wealth. It's just we look up to the wealthy for favours..... the masses are kinda like Maoris diving underwater for coins under a bridge.

If the richy rich up high looks down at us swimming with our childlike benevolent smile of need, and no coin is tossed, he is then not a good honky.

I would suggest that Mashmans interest may be similar to thugs joining in The Springbok riots..... in no way are their lives pure and good or non racist........, yet they fight for it in others who are in the public domain and under constant scrutiny....

Your mistake is in your first sentence. Altruistic wealthy are fewer and further apart than they used to be. My feeling is that the altruistic wealthy come from those that produced something to gain their wealth. Whereas the survey and most of the modern wealth has come about by those that feel an exaggerated sense of entitlement and are therefore not about to share. The wealthy the survey highlights are those that take without caring about fairness or sharing.

[mashman]

Far more bodies and carnage with psychopathic poor.....than altruistic wealthy.


Whether meant or not (psychopathic? really? not just a lack of understanding for most?), you cannot escape the fact that in the current system under which we live, the amount of money that you or I have directly affects the amount of money available to other people. It is an undeniable fact. Motive does not come into it, unless you're a financial reaper.



I would suggest that Mashmans interest may be similar to thugs joining in The Springbok riots..... in no way are their lives pure and good or even non racist........ yet they fight for purity in others who are in the public domain and under constant scrutiny....


:rofl: :facepalm: you're missing the point or most probaby trolling.



The ratio may be almost identical....
of altruistic wealthy vrs psychopathic wealthy
and altruistic protesters vrs psychopathic protesters


What about the other 99% of the population?



....... your charge upon the castle will require some more rebel rousing, maybe add some alcohol?


:rofl:@rebel rousing... missing the point? or just more trolling?

Thanks for that post, I almost wee'd in places. Are there any shades of grey? or can there only be black and white in your analysis of the entire population of the planet?

I walked passed a homeless guy the other day. I had 2 bags of chippies in my hands, a buy one get the other half price. I didn't need two bags. I gave him 1 of the bags. He looked hungry. I then went back to worked and didn't feel any different about myself. Nothing altruistic about my motives. There was a need, I filled it. Although I did think that the money he saved on food could go towards drugs or booze, that made me feel a little better about myself :)

[avgas]

Its funny I have no problem with the rich. But waste my fucking time and I will wish cancer on your grandkids.
I would like think I value time more than money - but that notion is bullshit as I am still an engineer, working my arse off for the minimum buck, rather than quiting it all to spend time with my family.

Ain't life fucked up.

[avgas]

I walked passed a homeless guy the other day. I had 2 bags of chippies in my hands, a buy one get the other half price. I didn't need two bags. I gave him 1 of the bags. He looked hungry. I then went back to worked and didn't feel any different about myself. Nothing altruistic about my motives. :)
You mean bastard.
Giving a homeless man ghost chips.
Thats cruel man.

[mashman]

You mean bastard.
Giving a homeless man ghost chips.
Thats cruel man.

gimmee a break, I was internalising a complicated situation.

[scissorhands]

gimmee a break, I was internalising a complicated situation.

aint we all sometimes.......

[mashman]

aint we all sometimes.......

aye... some get paid to spend all day thinking about how to move the country forwards too :crazy:

[Ocean1]

one of the few froggys I like ....

Monsieur Stephan [/I]

Ah, Rousseau. If I'd thought about it I'd have guessed you two would get on. You're aware that he recognised the need for individuals to opt out of his social contract?

What is the collective's purpose if not to foster and support the individual? Actually, don't bother, ancient debate and I don't need to do it yet again. Sufficed to say I don't feel very supported, so I decline to allow the collective to dictate terms with regard to my individual resources.

Indivisible part of the whole indeed.

[Ocean1]

you cannot escape the fact that in the current system under which we live, the amount of money that you or I have directly affects the amount of money available to other people. It is an undeniable fact.

It's unmitigated drivel is what it is.

There’s a reason the generally accepted term for the acquisition of money is to “make” it. There isn’t a restricted pool of cash and nobody is stealing your “share”. I thought you personally didn’t need or want money, how does it come about that you feel you have less than you need?

[mashman]

It's unmitigated drivel is what it is.

There’s a reason the generally accepted term for the acquisition of money is to “make” it. There isn’t a restricted pool of cash and nobody is stealing your “share”. I thought you personally didn’t need or want money, how does it come about that you feel you have less than you need?

If labelling the facts as drivel helps you sleep at night, then good for you. There is a finite money pool in NZ. It's a fact or we'd have enough money to pay for our services and wouldn't need to put people out of work to save money.

:rofl:@stealing my share. The only reason I have less than I need is that it takes money to promote/advertise/research etc... and generate a solid set of policies in order to offer people an alternative way of living. I need money for my family. Sure I don't want it, but I have people that rely on my earning it.

[Ocean1]

If labelling the facts as drivel helps you sleep at night, then good for you. There is a finite money pool in NZ. It's a fact or we'd have enough money to pay for our services and wouldn't need to put people out of work to save money.

I bow my head to your superior logic.


:rofl:@stealing my share. The only reason I have less than I need is that it takes money to promote/advertise/research etc... and generate a solid set of policies in order to offer people an alternative way of living. I need money for my family. Sure I don't want it, but I have people that rely on my earning it.

Further; I'd like to confess that I have some of your share of money. I have done since 1830, since which it's retained exactly the same comparitive value wrt the overall economy.

And I'm keeping it, 'cause I'm a cnut.

[mashman]

I bow my head to your superior logic.

Further; I'd like to confess that I have some of your share of money. I have done since 1830, since which it's retained exactly the same comparitive value wrt the overall economy.

And I'm keeping it, 'cause I'm a cnut.

About fuckin time too.

You used your time machine to take my money? I thought that was against your religion?

I knew that already.

[Brian d marge]

Ah, Rousseau. If I'd thought about it I'd have guessed you two would get on. You're aware that he recognised the need for individuals to opt out of his social contract?

What is the collective's purpose if not to foster and support the individual? Actually, don't bother, ancient debate and I don't need to do it yet again. Sufficed to say I don't feel very supported, so I decline to allow the collective to dictate terms with regard to my individual resources.

Indivisible part of the whole indeed.
you have to get bling for recognizing the frog

yes he did have the get out of jail card , but I prefer him to his mate Diderot ( poxy silent T ) or even Hobbs who I think Paula rennet secretly admired ( I swear she orgasmed over Hobbes use of the word " brutish " )

no, we have a social contract , and when parties exceed their mandate we have the right to " review " that contract. now would be a good time

and for those who ask what would I replace it with ,,,,, i would replace it with a similar system but with a council , the 6th estate, the greed council , made up from a random cross section of society , with no access to lawyers

simple really , no more 80 dollar underpants

Stephen

[scissorhands]

I read B F Skinners Walden, Huxleys The Island, and some other utopian stories. Even Heidi and Uncle Toms Cabin, all have similar themes of redemption, grace, and courage to do right. To kill a mocking bird....

[Big Dave]

http://rlv.zcache.com/tequila_mockingbird_photosculpture-p153826646206148830zv7fr_400.jpg

[Brian d marge]

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/sgpa7wEAz7I" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

and the old

Stephen , aka Jacques 3

[scissorhands]

In the bullshit department, a business man cant hold a candle to a clergyman


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeSSwKffj9o

[mashman]

In the bullshit department, a business man cant hold a candle to a clergyman

The man had a way about him :). Would it then follow that a religious businessman is the axis of evil :innocent:?

[puddytat]

Wealthy christians like Bush, Cheney spring to mind......some of the wealthiest institutions are founded on religious beliefs yet dont follow in Jesus, Mohammed, Yahwey et al footsteps.....
What I cant understand is that if you use a demographic like the wealthy in this example that people think your tarring them all to the same brush....FFS .Its like saying that all farmers dont give a shit about the enviroment....Or that conservationists are greenies,or lefties commies or righties fascists...I do believe though that alot some rich definitely think that they're better than the rest.....but their vote is worth only as much as mine.