No one

Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
No one

Brian37 wrote:

Look at you

With your caviar

Your Tuxedo

And fancy car...

It is a futile collection

That you obtain

To impress

That feeds no one

Feeds no one? Really? Who is it that Brian considers "no one".

All those losers on that boat. They are "no one". Probably better off starving than catching fish. They are just stinky poor people who smell like fish anyway. 

 

These kids certainly don't need to eat. 

 

And those people at the canning plant? They aren't people either. Just more poor fucks who aren't Brian, who cares if they eat. 

And those bozos who build Lamborghinis, they actually have the nerve to look proud about building that car for some rich guy. They are nobodies too. Fucking blue color loosers, building cars that Brian can't afford. They don't deserve to eat. 

You think this luxury shit appears out of thin air? That millionaires are out there fishing for their own caviar? The luxury industry employs millions from production to retail to service- and in general, people employed in luxury occupations make better money than those who make shit for Brian. If rich people stopped buying luxury items, a whole lot of people would be going hungry. 

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


zarathustra
atheist
zarathustra's picture
Posts: 1521
Joined: 2006-11-16
User is offlineOffline
Potential response:  "If

Potential response:  "If the rich were taxed more, the poor could get the money directly, without having to work for it."

There are no theists on operating tables.

πππ†
π†††


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15760
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
 Struck a nerve to the

 Struck a nerve to the point you pulled a stanza out one of my poems. The owners of the company are bozos on a couple of levels. Over priced impractical pieces of crap designed to do nothing but make the owners of the company rich. Other than being used to say "hey look at the money I have to waste on crap I really don't need" just to say "hey look at me", what exactly are they providing humanity other than status symbols? How are they helping humanity with providing cheaper transportation for those without millions and billions? How are they getting the planet away from impractacticle gas hogs? Tell me what a sports car does for humanity? Now at least Tesla is trying to build invironmentally friendly sports cars.

Oh I get everyone needs to eat, it isn't the workers who are bozos but the owners of the company. They are the assholes who are too lazy to improve humanity by making transporatation affordable to everyone and. Much easier for them to get rich selling needless crap to other rich people.

Macbeth Act 5 Scene 5 and Carl Sagan's Pale Blue Dot speech, is what you don't get. 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15760
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
zarathustra wrote:Potential

zarathustra wrote:

Potential response:  "If the rich were taxed more, the poor could get the money directly, without having to work for it."

Um no, if the rich paid their share of taxes the rest of us would not have to compensate for what they don't pay. I already went over rich people and even companies that do the right thing. Nick Hanaure, and COSTCO and Moo Cluck Moo, to name a couple.

Complete myth that higher taxes on the rich and higher worker pay will hurt the economy.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3929
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:zarathustra

Brian37 wrote:

zarathustra wrote:

Potential response:  "If the rich were taxed more, the poor could get the money directly, without having to work for it."

Um no, if the rich paid their share of taxes the rest of us would not have to compensate for what they don't pay. I already went over rich people and even companies that do the right thing. Nick Hanaure, and COSTCO and Moo Cluck Moo, to name a couple.

Complete myth that higher taxes on the rich and higher worker pay will hurt the economy.

The problem of low wages/high prices is due to overpopulation/limited natural resources. Swallow the red pill.

Leftist economics is everyone suffering the same because of this. Right wing economics is the poor should suffer, middle class works its ass off to get by and few rich take advantage of the situation.

So pick your poison arsenic or cyanide, left wing or right wing, democract or republican. But always stay on the blue pills the media feeds you.

Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen


butterbattle
ModeratorSuperfan
butterbattle's picture
Posts: 3945
Joined: 2008-09-12
User is offlineOffline
zarathustra wrote:Potential

zarathustra wrote:

Potential response:  "If the rich were taxed more, the poor could get the money directly, without having to work for it."

Lol!

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote: Struck a

Brian37 wrote:

 Struck a nerve to the point you pulled a stanza out one of my poems.

Yep, self centered obnoxious ignorance annoys me. 

 

Brian37 wrote:

The owners of the company are bozos on a couple of levels.

But you aren't. You have everything figured out. 

 

Brian37 wrote:

Over priced impractical pieces of crap designed to do nothing but make the owners of the company rich. Other than being used to say "hey look at the money I have to waste on crap I really don't need" just to say "hey look at me", what exactly are they providing humanity other than status symbols? How are they helping humanity with providing cheaper transportation for those without millions and billions?

I'm not an expert on cars, but many technological innovations in the car you drive today was first designed and tested on luxury cars of the past. I do know that Lamborghini was invented because Mr. Lamborghini was unhappy with the quality of the clutch in the Ferrari. Other conveniences like heated seats, individual temperature controls, power doors, remote start, gps and probably many of the internals that I know little about started in luxury cars and are now available in many middle class level sedans.

Wealthy people paying ridiculous prices for new technology creates the capital required to build factories that eventually put those items into mass production and thus, affordable to us peons. The same way that the computer you are on now can be purchased for a few hundred dollars while 30 years ago a computer of much lower quality costed many thousands and was a luxury toy for the rich and nerdy or an expensive tool for the businessman who wanted to impress.

Have a cell phone? They used to be so impractical that the only real reason to have one was as a status symbol- watch some early 90's movie and the car cell phone is always in some fancy car of a wealthy businessman. Now everyone and their 10 year old has one. In the meantime, the millions of people who invent, build, test and sell those things make a living. 

 

Brian37 wrote:
 

Oh I get everyone needs to eat, it isn't the workers who are bozos but the owners of the company. They are the assholes who are too lazy to improve humanity by making transporatation affordable to everyone and. Much easier for them to get rich selling needless crap to other rich people.

What are you doing to improve humanity exactly? 

 

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15760
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
EXC wrote:Brian37

EXC wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

zarathustra wrote:

Potential response:  "If the rich were taxed more, the poor could get the money directly, without having to work for it."

Um no, if the rich paid their share of taxes the rest of us would not have to compensate for what they don't pay. I already went over rich people and even companies that do the right thing. Nick Hanaure, and COSTCO and Moo Cluck Moo, to name a couple.

Complete myth that higher taxes on the rich and higher worker pay will hurt the economy.

The problem of low wages/high prices is due to overpopulation/limited natural resources. Swallow the red pill.

Leftist economics is everyone suffering the same because of this. Right wing economics is the poor should suffer, middle class works its ass off to get by and few rich take advantage of the situation.

So pick your poison arsenic or cyanide, left wing or right wing, democract or republican. But always stay on the blue pills the media feeds you.

 High prices are not do to limited resources. High prices are due to greed, period. The cost of living ratio was much smaller between the top and the bottom in 1970 as compared to to today. And even in my entire life, having seen the oil crisis of the 70s, stock market crash of the 80s, dot com boom/bust of the 90s and  the tripple wammy of our great recession, I have lived long enough to know what is going on. We are allowing the rich to write our laws and when they lose their losses get dumped on the rest of us. And that entire time pay has NOT kept up with the cost of living. 

Only one party is causing this. I only blame Dems and the voters who are not showing up to the voting booth bedause we pay kumbia too fucking much rather than stand up to that greed.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15760
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:Brian37

Beyond Saving wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

 Struck a nerve to the point you pulled a stanza out one of my poems.

Yep, self centered obnoxious ignorance annoys me. 

 

Brian37 wrote:

The owners of the company are bozos on a couple of levels.

But you aren't. You have everything figured out. 

 

Brian37 wrote:

Over priced impractical pieces of crap designed to do nothing but make the owners of the company rich. Other than being used to say "hey look at the money I have to waste on crap I really don't need" just to say "hey look at me", what exactly are they providing humanity other than status symbols? How are they helping humanity with providing cheaper transportation for those without millions and billions?

I'm not an expert on cars, but many technological innovations in the car you drive today was first designed and tested on luxury cars of the past. I do know that Lamborghini was invented because Mr. Lamborghini was unhappy with the quality of the clutch in the Ferrari. Other conveniences like heated seats, individual temperature controls, power doors, remote start, gps and probably many of the internals that I know little about started in luxury cars and are now available in many middle class level sedans.

Wealthy people paying ridiculous prices for new technology creates the capital required to build factories that eventually put those items into mass production and thus, affordable to us peons. The same way that the computer you are on now can be purchased for a few hundred dollars while 30 years ago a computer of much lower quality costed many thousands and was a luxury toy for the rich and nerdy or an expensive tool for the businessman who wanted to impress.

Have a cell phone? They used to be so impractical that the only real reason to have one was as a status symbol- watch some early 90's movie and the car cell phone is always in some fancy car of a wealthy businessman. Now everyone and their 10 year old has one. In the meantime, the millions of people who invent, build, test and sell those things make a living. 

 

Brian37 wrote:
 

Oh I get everyone needs to eat, it isn't the workers who are bozos but the owners of the company. They are the assholes who are too lazy to improve humanity by making transporatation affordable to everyone and. Much easier for them to get rich selling needless crap to other rich people.

What are you doing to improve humanity exactly? 

 

 

Not going to go there buddy. You are the one with the attitude that the only measure of a human is to become a title or paycheck. Someone sold you the bullshit to "make a name for yourself". Now you are baiting me with a question I don't meausere myself by. 

I will tell what I have been doing every day since 01. I have been on line, spreading advocating the values of skepicism and science and education. I have everyday been debating religion and challinging it. On top of 20 years of writing poetry even prior. Now somehow you think all that requires some sort of monetary meausre or title for me to contribute?

 

You want to put me on a spreadsheet but humans cannot be put on spreadsheets. Keep watching/or reading Sagan's Pale Blue Dot speech, until you get it. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Beyond Saving

Brian37 wrote:

Beyond Saving wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

 

Not going to go there buddy. You are the one with the attitude that the only measure of a human is to become a title or paycheck. Someone sold you the bullshit to "make a name for yourself". Now you are baiting me with a question I don't meausere myself by. 

I will tell what I have been doing every day since 01. I have been on line, spreading advocating the values of skepicism and science and education. I have everyday been debating religion and challinging it. On top of 20 years of writing poetry even prior. Now somehow you think all that requires some sort of monetary meausre or title for me to contribute?

 

You want to put me on a spreadsheet but humans cannot be put on spreadsheets. 

 

 

 I'm just asking you to judge yourself by the same standards you judge others. Why isn't that fair? I don't judge people based on what they do to improve humanity, because I don't care. If they are happy doing what they do, good for them. Whether it benefits me or humanity at large doesn't factor in. If I die today, very few people will notice I ever existed. But I'm not running around accusing others of not doing enough. You are. And ironically, the ones you are accusing are people who did manage to influence humanity enough to be noticed.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15760
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
 No you are not, you are

 No you are not, you are projecting what was sold to you onto others. There is no universal standard other than life is diverse and humans are diverse. You however mesuare that worth in very superfical ways. I will never be impressed with what you own or what you wear or where you live or how much you make. The earth was around long before you were born and it will be arround long after we die. 

I would however shit a brick and be very impressed if you ever learn that.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:  No you are

Brian37 wrote:

 No you are not, you are projecting what was sold to you onto others. There is no universal standard other than life is diverse and humans are diverse.

Then why are you judging rich people based on what they decide to spend money on? I agree with you, a Lambo is a waste of money, I wouldn't own one if I were worth 100 billion, the difference is I am not critcizing those who decide owning one is important to them. 

 

Quote:

You however mesuare that worth in very superfical ways.0

Oh really? How do I measure worth? Please tell.

 

Quote:

I will never be impressed with what you own or what you wear or where you live or how much you make.

Good thing that I have never had impressing you included on my list of goals for anything I have ever done in my life. Sorry, but you simply aren't anywhere near important enough to me for me to worry about whether or not you are impressed. Amusing though given your apparent high opinion of the value of you internet rants. 

 

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 4901
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote: I'm not

Beyond Saving wrote:

I'm not an expert on cars, but many technological innovations in the car you drive today was first designed and tested on luxury cars of the past. I do know that Lamborghini was invented because Mr. Lamborghini was unhappy with the quality of the clutch in the Ferrari. Other conveniences like heated seats, individual temperature controls, power doors, remote start, gps and probably many of the internals that I know little about started in luxury cars and are now available in many middle class level sedans.

Hmmm, well don't compare these extremely expensive high tech, state of the art, hand made, high performance machines to other luxury vehicles of the past. Things like variable speed windshield wipers, power windows, power steering, power brakes and AC all came from normal every day cars in America, Britain, Germany and France. Later Japan would be included in that circle of innovators. 

Buick is a good example along with some other car companies (Cadillac, Packard, Lincoln and Tucker to name a few), some of which do not exist today. So don't group stuff like Ferrari and Lamborghini as being the one and only innovators of the current tech we now take for granted. There are tons of innovations which came from America and from family sedans long before they were used in those high priced cars.

 

 


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
digitalbeachbum wrote:Beyond

digitalbeachbum wrote:

Beyond Saving wrote:

I'm not an expert on cars, but many technological innovations in the car you drive today was first designed and tested on luxury cars of the past. I do know that Lamborghini was invented because Mr. Lamborghini was unhappy with the quality of the clutch in the Ferrari. Other conveniences like heated seats, individual temperature controls, power doors, remote start, gps and probably many of the internals that I know little about started in luxury cars and are now available in many middle class level sedans.

Hmmm, well don't compare these extremely expensive high tech, state of the art, hand made, high performance machines to other luxury vehicles of the past. Things like variable speed windshield wipers, power windows, power steering, power brakes and AC all came from normal every day cars in America, Britain, Germany and France. Later Japan would be included in that circle of innovators. 

Buick is a good example along with some other car companies (Cadillac, Packard, Lincoln and Tucker to name a few), some of which do not exist today. So don't group stuff like Ferrari and Lamborghini as being the one and only innovators of the current tech we now take for granted. There are tons of innovations which came from America and from family sedans long before they were used in those high priced cars.

 

 

I never said they were the only innovators, just pointing out that they do contribute. Although Buick, Cadillac etc. are also luxury brands, often owned by the very people who own sports cars. Most Lambo owners don't drive it as their daily vehicle. The only point is that new technology usually doesn't reach average people until after it has been sold at inflated rates to higher end consumers. I'm not a car guy, so I can't confidently point to which innovations came from what brands, but it is hard to believe tht the push for high performance and high end luxury of these brands didn't have some innovations that are used in lower end cars. 

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 4901
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving

Beyond Saving wrote:

digitalbeachbum wrote:

Beyond Saving wrote:

I'm not an expert on cars, but many technological innovations in the car you drive today was first designed and tested on luxury cars of the past. I do know that Lamborghini was invented because Mr. Lamborghini was unhappy with the quality of the clutch in the Ferrari. Other conveniences like heated seats, individual temperature controls, power doors, remote start, gps and probably many of the internals that I know little about started in luxury cars and are now available in many middle class level sedans.

Hmmm, well don't compare these extremely expensive high tech, state of the art, hand made, high performance machines to other luxury vehicles of the past. Things like variable speed windshield wipers, power windows, power steering, power brakes and AC all came from normal every day cars in America, Britain, Germany and France. Later Japan would be included in that circle of innovators. 

Buick is a good example along with some other car companies (Cadillac, Packard, Lincoln and Tucker to name a few), some of which do not exist today. So don't group stuff like Ferrari and Lamborghini as being the one and only innovators of the current tech we now take for granted. There are tons of innovations which came from America and from family sedans long before they were used in those high priced cars.

 

 

I never said they were the only innovators, just pointing out that they do contribute. Although Buick, Cadillac etc. are also luxury brands, often owned by the very people who own sports cars. Most Lambo owners don't drive it as their daily vehicle. The only point is that new technology usually doesn't reach average people until after it has been sold at inflated rates to higher end consumers. I'm not a car guy, so I can't confidently point to which innovations came from what brands, but it is hard to believe tht the push for high performance and high end luxury of these brands didn't have some innovations that are used in lower end cars. 

Well I'm a car guy and I can point to which inventor and what car line it was introduced on and I can tell you the innovations from American luxury sedans, like Caddies and Buick, Tucker and Packard all greatly outweight any thing done in the early stages of European luxury cars. Yes, they had innovations too, but of them all BMW and VW are tops on my list.

Also if you didn't know it, Lambo's and Ferrari's were racers at first. They didn't really get in to those high tech, luxury models until the 60's. Early models were strickly racing circuit cars and weren't made for driving to dinner parties or around town shopping.


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
digitalbeachbum wrote:Yes,

digitalbeachbum wrote:

Yes, they had innovations too, but of them all BMW and VW are tops on my list.

My only point. Even one minor innovation is a fuckton larger contribution to cars than Brian ever has or ever will contribute. Which particular companies were more or less innovative is irrelevant to the point. In the world of automobiles, Lamborghini is hundreds of times smaller in terms of revenue, profit, employees and R&D investment so of course they don't produce as much as the behemoths that owned Detroit. 

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15760
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:Brian37

Beyond Saving wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

 No you are not, you are projecting what was sold to you onto others. There is no universal standard other than life is diverse and humans are diverse.

Then why are you judging rich people based on what they decide to spend money on? I agree with you, a Lambo is a waste of money, I wouldn't own one if I were worth 100 billion, the difference is I am not critcizing those who decide owning one is important to them. 

 

Quote:

You however mesuare that worth in very superfical ways.0

Oh really? How do I measure worth? Please tell.

 

Quote:

I will never be impressed with what you own or what you wear or where you live or how much you make.

Good thing that I have never had impressing you included on my list of goals for anything I have ever done in my life. Sorry, but you simply aren't anywhere near important enough to me for me to worry about whether or not you are impressed. Amusing though given your apparent high opinion of the value of you internet rants. 

 

Still not getting it. If anyone is self centered it is you. Obviously I am important enough for you to start a thread about in order to demonize someone who doesn't see status as the center of the universe. See Sagan's Pale Blue Dot speech, repeat until you actualy do get it. 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Still not

Brian37 wrote:

Still not getting it. If anyone is self centered it is you.

Who is the one who presumes to critique how others spend their money? Actually, I suppose in a way I am self centered, I don't give a shit how much anyone makes or what they spend it on unless I have some personal interest. If some billionaire set a few million on fire just to watch it burn I wouldn't get upset about the 'waste'. I only care what I spend my own money on and don't presume to tell others what to do. So I concede this point, I am self centered. For you, the more accurate description would be 'self important'

 

Quote:

Obviously I am important enough for you to start a thread about in order to demonize someone who doesn't see status as the center of the universe. See Sagan's Pale Blue Dot speech, repeat until you actualy do get it. 

Demonize? Hardly, merely pointing out your hypocrisy. You claim you don't see status as important, yet most of your posts you make comments about someone else's status (even when it isn't germane). You certainly talk about my business more than I do. You routinely judge people based on how much they make, what they spend their money on and their relative popularity/infamy. You are by far the most status obsessed person on this site.

Heck, you're so vain that you think me deciding to poke a little fun at a quote from your poem indicates some level of importance. I'm just some random guy facing a long day in the kitchen who thought that a light diversion would be amusing. I guess I should be flattered that you think I am so important that me reading and commenting on your poem is important, but somehow I'm not.  

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15760
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:Brian37

Beyond Saving wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

Still not getting it. If anyone is self centered it is you.

Who is the one who presumes to critique how others spend their money? Actually, I suppose in a way I am self centered, I don't give a shit how much anyone makes or what they spend it on unless I have some personal interest. If some billionaire set a few million on fire just to watch it burn I wouldn't get upset about the 'waste'. I only care what I spend my own money on and don't presume to tell others what to do. So I concede this point, I am self centered. For you, the more accurate description would be 'self important'

 

Quote:

Obviously I am important enough for you to start a thread about in order to demonize someone who doesn't see status as the center of the universe. See Sagan's Pale Blue Dot speech, repeat until you actualy do get it. 

Demonize? Hardly, merely pointing out your hypocrisy. You claim you don't see status as important, yet most of your posts you make comments about someone else's status (even when it isn't germane). You certainly talk about my business more than I do. You routinely judge people based on how much they make, what they spend their money on and their relative popularity/infamy. You are by far the most status obsessed person on this site.

Heck, you're so vain that you think me deciding to poke a little fun at a quote from your poem indicates some level of importance. I'm just some random guy facing a long day in the kitchen who thought that a light diversion would be amusing. I guess I should be flattered that you think I am so important that me reading and commenting on your poem is important, but somehow I'm not.  

What hypocrisy? No dumbass, I have been completely consistent. My problem is not all wealth. My problem is attitude. The world has enough wealthy people and many of them DO do good. But the climate is simply not there currently to be helpfull to our species. It is about propfit, and it is leading to more polution and it is dragging us down. You may find cheap labor the key to gobal competition, I do not. I see it as distructive and a race to the bottom.

 

No vainity on my part. I don't post pictures of objects that amount to status symbols, I merely responded to you. You feel flattered? And you want to call me vain? If I liked pot, I'd ask you for some because it must be some really good shit you are smoking.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:What

Brian37 wrote:

What hypocrisy? No dumbass, I have been completely consistent. My problem is not all wealth. My problem is attitude. The world has enough wealthy people and many of them DO do good.

Yet you judge everyone who who buys sports cars, tuxedos and caviar. You went so far as to label the owners of Lamborghini as 'bozos' when you obviously have no clue who owns it, who runs it, how it is ran or anything. You just assume it is bad by whatever standard you have.

 

Quote:

But the climate is simply not there currently to be helpfull to our species.

See, self important. I would never presume to know what is best for an entire species. I'm not even confident I know what is best for me. Given my history, I suspect that 30 years from now, if I am alive, I will look at some of my decisions and think they were stupid.

 

Quote:

It is about propfit, and it is leading to more polution and it is dragging us down.

 

Well yeah, humans mostly produce for profit. Are you going to go work for an employer without getting paid? You greedy profit seeking asshole. When your employer fired you, why didn't you volunteer to keep working without pay?

 

Quote:

You may find cheap labor the key to gobal competition, I do not. I see it as distructive and a race to the bottom.

Actually I don't. I see cheap labor as a temporary solution that will disappear as the rest of the world catches up to us. Already, cheap labor is disappearing in China, and within my lifetime, I expect to see human factory work become a thing of the past. If anything, cheap labor is a hindrance to innovation. I'm a big fan of replacing human labor with robots and computers. The availability of cheap labor overseas has the effect of reducing investment in humanless manufacturing, which is going to dramatically improve our standard of living. Not that you have the ability or desire to seriously discuss the implications of removing the necessity of human labor from manufacturing.

 

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


zarathustra
atheist
zarathustra's picture
Posts: 1521
Joined: 2006-11-16
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Still not

Brian37 wrote:
Still not getting it. If anyone is self centered it is you.
I think we are all self-centered to some degree.  We care more about feeding our own kids than those starving in the 3rd world.  When the company downsizes, we hope someone else gets cut and we get to stay.

I just purchased lunch at the grocery store and got a coffee for $1.49 (free refills), rather than putting it in the Salvation Army tin outside.  Is that self-centered enough to put me in the Lamborghini crowd?

There are no theists on operating tables.

πππ†
π†††


butterbattle
ModeratorSuperfan
butterbattle's picture
Posts: 3945
Joined: 2008-09-12
User is offlineOffline
zarathustra wrote:Brian37

zarathustra wrote:

Brian37 wrote:
Still not getting it. If anyone is self centered it is you.
I think we are all self-centered to some degree.  We care more about feeding our own kids than those starving in the 3rd world.  When the company downsizes, we hope someone else gets cut and we get to stay.

I just purchased lunch at the grocery store and got a coffee for $1.49 (free refills), rather than putting it in the Salvation Army tin outside.  Is that self-centered enough to put me in the Lamborghini crowd?

Worth.

Probably no free refills at the homeless shelter. 

Lol.

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Beyond is pretty accurate

Beyond is pretty accurate here. There are a number of industries that prove it. Including the one I know more about than most people: gaming. 

 

The gaming industry is rather perfect to use as a microcosm for any other. When a new console comes out, it is too expensive for the average person to buy. It literally costs the console manufacturer more money to sell it than they make back, even if you include royalties and licensing fees.  

The last two Nintendo consoles are an exception, but considering the fact that Nintendo hasn't been a serious competitor since about 1995, that doesn't really mean anything. 

The first XBox never made money. When it was discontinued, MS' ledger was in the red. The 360 console took a good two years to start making money. The XBox 1 is still in the red.  

Sony is no different. They didn't bully and buy their way in the way MS did, so they never took as big of a hit. But the whole reason they crushed Nintendo and Sega was because they offered licensing at a ridiculous discount, and practically every third party developer jumped to them as a result. Worse for Sony is that most of their hardware was proprietary. They actually designed and manufactured many of the parts in their consoles, while MS bought parts off the shelf and slapped them together. Both of these strategies together cost billions in revenue. The first resulted in massive profits in the long run, but the second was only viable until MS entered the market. 

The PS1 took 3 or 4 years to start making money. It wasn't really until they released the miniaturised version of the console that they were in the black. The PS2 made money faster, but it didn't have any competition for 2 years. It took those two years for the console to realise profit, even without competition. Simply because of all the R&D that went into the emotion engine and everything else. The PS3 took a good 3 or 4 years because they had competition before they even released the console. It took them 6 or 7 years to surpass XBox 360 sales and continue their winning streak. The PS4 is in the same boat as the XBox 1, in the red. It'll be another year before those consoles start making profit. 

In order for a console to make money, it must be sold en masse. In order to be sold en masse, it must be cheap enough for most anyone to afford. In order to be cheap enough for most anyone to afford, the manufacturing process must be refined and made more efficient. In order to refine and improve efficiency, there must be income, even if that income is outweighed by losses in manufacturing and R&D. In order to have income, it must be sold at a high price. In order to be sold at a high price, there must be consumers who have resources to burn. That requires a population of affluent people who aren't very discriminating in their purchases. 

If everyone were so positioned, the gaming industry would already be dead. Even giants like Sony & MS cannot provide sufficient supply to meet that kind of demand. The market would be riddled with cheap knockoffs that attempted to undercut the quality consoles, which is exactly what happened in the 80's before Nintendo came around. It was an unmitigated disaster. It almost destroyed the industry when it was still cheap to make games, and a single person could code multiple games per year.  

Today it takes hundreds of people and often multiple years to make a single major title. If the disaster of the 80's were repeated today, the damage to the global economy would be incalculable. Tens of millions of people would be out of work, and with nowhere to go. 

The gaming industry works the same as every major industry, from mining to vehicle manufacturing to farming and everything else. Every industry has quirks unique to itself, but the basic principles remain. Innovation and improvement costs a lot of money. That money comes from consumers who often have more resources than sense. As sense is a rare commodity, so must be excessive resources. 

Though I will say that the balance doesn't need to be as broken as it is, there must be an imbalance or everything goes to shit with con artists and opportunists abound.

 

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 4901
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
zarathustra wrote: Brian37

zarathustra wrote:

Brian37 wrote:
Still not getting it. If anyone is self centered it is you.
I think we are all self-centered to some degree.  We care more about feeding our own kids than those starving in the 3rd world.  When the company downsizes, we hope someone else gets cut and we get to stay.

I just purchased lunch at the grocery store and got a coffee for $1.49 (free refills), rather than putting it in the Salvation Army tin outside.  Is that self-centered enough to put me in the Lamborghini crowd?

I won't give any more to those groups. Most of the money goes to executives who do nothing to earn 500k a year so they can buy a Lamborghini.