The selling off of American Energy Companies
Message boards :
Politics :
The selling off of American Energy Companies
Message board moderation
Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · Next
| Author | Message |
|---|---|
 Rush  Send message Joined: 3 Apr 99 Posts: 3131 Credit: 302,569 RAC: 0 
|
I've been working long hard hours on snow removal and really don't have the energy to argue with such an overblown ideolog. You rarely, if ever post any arguments. Usually all you do is post your conclusions, then, sometimes, repeat them. As an example, one of your prior posts in this thread: "Using money in a transaction does not make one a capitalist. "Working for wages does not make one a capitalist. "Ownership does not make one a capitalist." There are no arguments there, just your stated conclusions. Somethin's done all right. Cordially, Rush elrushbo2@theobviousgmail.com Remove the obvious... 
ID: 864883 ·  |
Hev  Send message Joined: 4 Jun 05 Posts: 1118 Credit: 598,303 RAC: 0 
|
Rush, I have mentioned Marx as a starting point, you have vaguely mentioned what is extensively available in the economic and philosophic literature but not cited any sources. ID: 865009 · |
Aristoteles Doukas  Send message Joined: 11 Apr 08 Posts: 1091 Credit: 2,140,913 RAC: 0 
|
surprise. once again he/she don´t have any ID: 865037 · |
|
Rush Send message Joined: 3 Apr 99 Posts: 3131 Credit: 302,569 RAC: 0
|
Rush, I have mentioned Marx as a starting point, you have vaguely mentioned what is extensively available in the economic and philosophic literature but not cited any sources. Hev, again, I don't know what to tell you. You don't need me to quote someone who agrees with me to refute the point. I noted a fundamental principle of a well-established concept, and I gave you the reasons why that principle is fundamental. If you disagree, say so. "You're wrong, Rush. Ownership isn't a fundamental and defining part of capitalism because..." or "Rush, capitalist isn't defined as a supporter of capitalism because..." and present your reasons. You could even use Marx as your starting point if you wish, say, "Well, Marx said..." and throw that in there if you wish. I didn't use him because he died, what, 130 or so years ago, and had no idea about modern economics. This is a discussion of ideas, not a battle of the links. Cordially, Rush elrushbo2@theobviousgmail.com Remove the obvious...
ID: 865065 · |
|
Aristoteles Doukas Send message Joined: 11 Apr 08 Posts: 1091 Credit: 2,140,913 RAC: 0
|
rush, check out the definition of capitalist before you brag here ID: 865084 · |
|
Rush Send message Joined: 3 Apr 99 Posts: 3131 Credit: 302,569 RAC: 0
|
Ohdearjeebus: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/capitalism: an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market. Note the term "ownership." http://www.thefreedictionary.com/dict.asp?Word=capitalist: 1. A supporter of capitalism. 2. An investor of capital in business, especially one having a major financial interest in an important enterprise. 3. A person of great wealth. Note the 1st definition. Which as I said, Robert does, willingly. http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=capitalism: S: (n) capitalism, capitalist economy (an economic system based on private ownership of capital). Ooops. Once again, there's that pesky word ownership. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism: Capitalism is an economic system in which wealth, and the means of producing wealth, are privately owned and controlled rather than commonly, publicly, or state-owned and controlled. In capitalism, the land, labor, and capital are owned, operated, and traded by private individuals, and investments, distribution, income, production, pricing and supply of goods, commodities and services are determined by voluntary private decision in a market economy free of government intervention. A distinguishing feature of capitalism is that each person owns his or her own labor and therefore is allowed to sell the use of it to employers. See that last sentence? "A distinguishing feature of capitalism is that each person owns his or her own labor and therefore is allowed to sell the use of it to employers." What a complete waste of time. Cordially, Rush elrushbo2@theobviousgmail.com Remove the obvious...
ID: 865093 · |
|
Aristoteles Doukas Send message Joined: 11 Apr 08 Posts: 1091 Credit: 2,140,913 RAC: 0
|
Ohdearjeebus: well 1. in communist system you own them as well 2. you think that people are supporter of capitalism "cause you seez so", please. 3. oops, so they do in communism 4. funny, same thing happen in communism ID: 865132 · |
Fuzzy Hollynoodles  Send message Joined: 3 Apr 99 Posts: 9659 Credit: 251,998 RAC: 0 |
Ohdearjeebus: But it was your own decision to waste your time, wasn't it? Did anybody hold a gun to your head and told you to do so? What happened to the principles of Objectivism about not forcing anyone to do anything against their will? I assume you were not forced, you wasted your time of your own free will, right? So you're just ranting here... "I'm trying to maintain a shred of dignity in this world." - Me 
ID: 865355 · |
|
Rush Send message Joined: 3 Apr 99 Posts: 3131 Credit: 302,569 RAC: 0
|
Ohdearjeebus: I meant more that it was a waste of time because I'm betting the confusees still won't get it. Of course it was my decision. Of course no one held a gun to my head, I made my own choice to do it. I mean, duh. What happened to the principles of Objectivism about not forcing anyone to do anything against their will? I assume you were not forced, you wasted your time of your own free will, right? So you're just ranting here... The principles of o'ism are alive and well. Again, I meant that it was a waste of time because they still won't get it. It's just sad (and sometimes hilarious) to me how the simplest, simplest, simplest, simplest concepts and ideas are beyond people. Cordially, Rush elrushbo2@theobviousgmail.com Remove the obvious...
ID: 865387 · |
|
Hev Send message Joined: 4 Jun 05 Posts: 1118 Credit: 598,303 RAC: 0
|
It's just sad (and sometimes hilarious) to me how the simplest, simplest, simplest, simplest concepts and ideas are beyond people. I know, it's frustrating isn't it? ID: 865388 · |
|
Fuzzy Hollynoodles Send message Joined: 3 Apr 99 Posts: 9659 Credit: 251,998 RAC: 0 |
Ohdearjeebus: And then you rant about it, duh! :-P What happened to the principles of Objectivism about not forcing anyone to do anything against their will? I assume you were not forced, you wasted your time of your own free will, right? So you're just ranting here... Well, "Against Stupidity, The Gods Themselves Contend In Vain" It's your choice if you want to contend or not, duh! Of course it's your time, you can waste it on what and whom you want, but don't rant about it after, please. Thank you. "I'm trying to maintain a shred of dignity in this world." - Me
ID: 865406 · |
|
Rush Send message Joined: 3 Apr 99 Posts: 3131 Credit: 302,569 RAC: 0
|
Of course it was my decision. Of course no one held a gun to my head, I made my own choice to do it. I mean, duh. I post as I wish. I don't think one, short, 6 word sentence is a rant, but if you wish to characterize it as rant, you are more than welcome to. It's your choice if you want to contend or not, duh! Of course it's your time, you can waste it on what and whom you want, but don't rant about it after, please. Thank you. Again, I post as I wish, just as everyone here does. I'm not interested in how you would have me post or not. Cordially, Rush elrushbo2@theobviousgmail.com Remove the obvious...
ID: 865426 · |
|
Fuzzy Hollynoodles Send message Joined: 3 Apr 99 Posts: 9659 Credit: 251,998 RAC: 0 |
Of course it was my decision. Of course no one held a gun to my head, I made my own choice to do it. I mean, duh. Uhhh getting miffed are we? Lighten up, it's Valentine's Day.   ;-)"I'm trying to maintain a shred of dignity in this world." - Me
ID: 865441 · |
|
Rush Send message Joined: 3 Apr 99 Posts: 3131 Credit: 302,569 RAC: 0
|
Uhhh getting miffed are we? Of course not. Cordially, Rush elrushbo2@theobviousgmail.com Remove the obvious...
ID: 865451 · |
|
Fuzzy Hollynoodles Send message Joined: 3 Apr 99 Posts: 9659 Credit: 251,998 RAC: 0 |
Uhhh getting miffed are we? Good.   Check your gmail and get a good laugh, dear. I think you need one... "I'm trying to maintain a shred of dignity in this world." - Me
ID: 865455 · |
John McLeod VII  Send message Joined: 15 Jul 99 Posts: 24806 Credit: 790,712 RAC: 0 
|
ID: 865459 · |
Robert Waite  Send message Joined: 23 Oct 07 Posts: 2417 Credit: 18,192,122 RAC: 59
|
Pour through your libertarian leaflets for a thousand years and you'll not find a connection between capitalism and ownership of a damned computer. Just admit that you made a blanket statement that was wrong. A capitalist is one who uses their capital (money) to invest in the abilities and skills of others. That is why Lincoln said labour comes first. Without labour, the capitalist has nothing to invest in. The reality of the capitalist is they create nothing. They build nothing. They simply invest in the abilities of others to create and build. I am not a capitalist. I actually provide something of myself to the job. You won't find me lounging by the pool waiting for my dividend cheques to roll in. ID: 865575 · |
|
Rush Send message Joined: 3 Apr 99 Posts: 3131 Credit: 302,569 RAC: 0
|
Pour through your libertarian leaflets for a thousand years and you'll not find a connection between capitalism and ownership of a damned computer. A) Why, 'cuz you sez so? What possibly could give your readers even the slightest indication that you've ever even seen such a thing, let alone many of them? B) I have demonstrated you wrong, above. I even noted the easily obtainable sources so people wouldn't have to spend their own few seconds looking for what was readily available. C) I doubt I've even seen a "libertarian leaflet" in my life. I usually seek out academic sources. D) The computer was just an example, any private property would have sufficed. Just admit that you made a blanket statement that was wrong. I did no such thing, as was evidenced above. Here, I'll try to help you: "Rush, ownership is NOT a part of capitalism because...." A capitalist is one who uses their capital (money) to invest in the abilities and skills of others. Which, once again, applies to you as well. Assuming you bought that computer and didn't come by it using force or fraud, you invested in the abilities and skills of others to buy a computer that you yourself could not produce. You invested in the computer because the computer was worth more to you than the money in your pocket was. You got a return on your investment. Now, are there people who can invest millions? Of course. But that's just a matter of scale. They aren't doing anything different than you are. That is why Lincoln said labour comes first. Which is wrong. As usual. First that "capitalist" (you) invests his time and effort into creating something. Bread. Butter. Raising chickens. He invests in himself and produces something. He then trades what he produces for what others produce. They both gain. Some people are orders of magnitude better at it than others. C'est la vie. The reality of the capitalist is they create nothing. They build nothing. Of course, this is just wrong as well. If this were true, all yer swell worker pals in the UAW wouldn't be sitting around not making cars and begging GM (anyone) to give them jobs. All they have to do is just start building the cars by themselves. There's nothing stopping them. They don't need anything else but themselves. Right? They just need labor. Right? And yet, they don't produce any cars. The have millions of man-hours of labor at their disposal, all the labor they could ever need and they don't make car one. They don't do anything but watch their membership numbers dwindle. That's brilliant. I am not a capitalist. I actually provide something of myself to the job. You are a capitalist for all of the reasons noted in this and prior posts. And as I said, "you rarely, if ever post any arguments. Usually all you do is post your conclusions, then, sometimes, repeat them." Here you just repeated your conclusion again, without any reasoning. You won't find me lounging by the pool waiting for my dividend cheques to roll in. That's your choice. Work your fingers to the bone if you wish. Or don't. Who cares? Cordially, Rush elrushbo2@theobviousgmail.com Remove the obvious...
ID: 865584 · |
|
Robert Waite Send message Joined: 23 Oct 07 Posts: 2417 Credit: 18,192,122 RAC: 59
|
I see where you are getting confused. You are blending the capitalist system, capitalists and those forced to live within the system into a single entity. The capitalists are the ones who created this system that is, not a big suprise, reliant upon capitalists. The capitalist system is structured to focus the main flow of capital toward the few at the top of the food chain. It's a hell of a deal if you are one of the controllers. Sadly, the vast majority are not now, nor ever will be at the top of the food chain and even though we all work for money and use that money to facilitate exchanges of goods and services it doesn't make us a capitalist. I think the term "wage slave of the capitalists" would be more accurate. It ain't so just because I says so...it just is. ID: 865619 · |
|
Aristoteles Doukas Send message Joined: 11 Apr 08 Posts: 1091 Credit: 2,140,913 RAC: 0
|
Ohdearjeebus: do you understand ID: 865622 · |
©2023 University of California
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.