If a Cure for AIDS was Invented...

[Quoi_Tu]

How is the fact that people are greedy a justification for having things such as monopolies? Greed doesn't justify more greed. That's how it's circular.

 

 

 

Socialism = Monopoly

 

 

 

Invisible hand = Monopoly

 

 

 

That's where you're wrong. The invisible hand allows companies to spring forth in face of potential monopolies while with socialism, the government is the monopoly.

 

 

 

Of course, this is all thinking in black and white when the ideal solution is grey.

[Faux]

 

Not every country has the same resources as Japan. A GOOD WORKFORCE isn't something every country has. Sure you can say "they have the potential to" but it still means nothing.

 

Japan has good resources? What resources would these be?

 

Ever taken basic microecon? Humans ARE resources. And them Japanese humans are some good ones.

 

 

 

 

 

Can you quote his reply to this? I blocked his stupid [wagon] a long time ago :lol:

[Faux]

For the last two posts on the last page, how do you two propose this be done? How do we somehow change the lifestyles that are drilled into us and make everyone better people for the common good, people willing to sacrifice their lifestyle to save those halfway across the world?

 

 

 

Capitalism is unjustifiable. Socialism has flaws yes, but it is better than what we have now.

 

Fine, have fun up on your moral high horse. The practical bastards don't mind being on the ground.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Capitalism isn't practical either. It creates a [cabbage] of problems that people in the future will have to deal with. Capitalism has helped with technological advances, but we are past the stage where we need capitalism to give us those. .(and we didn't NEED them in the first place.) We would have probably advanced at the same level without such a "free market" but what I'm saying is that you could look at it that way and you wouldn't be totally wrong.

 

 

 

For the last two posts on the last page, how do you two propose this be done? How do we somehow change the lifestyles that are drilled into us and make everyone better people for the common good, people willing to sacrifice their lifestyle to save those halfway across the world?

 

 

 

It's just a change in the zeitgeist. Personally, I just bring it up whenever I can, try to give as much to charity as I possibly can without me having to live on the streets (and even that you could possibly be considerred selfish).

 

 

 

It's not that I'm on a "moral high horse".. It's just that these problems have a relatively easy solution and it annoys me when people say stuff like "how do we change the way we have been taught to live" - well ffs it's only a CHOICE. If you're conscious of it it isn't hard at all.

 

 

 

Hey bud, you shouldn't even come back to this thread until you back up the stupid [cabbage] you posted some pages back.

 

 

 

You keep bashing capitalism yet you can't come up with something to replace it. Sorry man, NOTHING is perfect. But capitalism is effective for what it is.

[Rebdragon]

? Seriously? Lol.

 

 

 

Anyways, quoted it up the page I believe.

[Faux]

Haha, yeah I see. Exactly what I expected from him :lol:

[Zierro]

I implied that monopolies, in the context of a capitalistic society, are bad (my main point involving greed). In technical terms, socialism is a monopoly but in my opinion it's a good one because it lacks the greed, which was my main point in the first place. So really, saying socialism is a monopoly when you know fully well what I implied doesn't hold much water at all.

[user1991]

How is the fact that people are greedy a justification for having things such as monopolies? Greed doesn't justify more greed. That's how it's circular.

 

 

 

Socialism = Monopoly

 

 

 

Invisible hand = Monopoly

 

 

 

That's where you're wrong. The invisible hand allows companies to spring forth in face of potential monopolies while with socialism, the government is the monopoly.

 

 

 

Of course, this is all thinking in black and white when the ideal solution is grey.

 

 

 

What about worker's ownership of the means of production/distribution of goods?

 

 

 

And no, socialism isn't ideal (it's better than capitalism) but with the abundance of right wing d-bags that there are in this world we can't just argue for what we want 500 years in the future. If we're going to be pragmatic about it then we have to actually try and solve the problem. There are two ways of going about this:

 

 

 

1. Reform

 

 

 

2. Revolution

 

 

 

If it's a choice between them, I'll take reform. It's been said over and over and over, "there is no war but the class war" and it's true.

[Rebdragon]

Rofl. We're scumbags for supporting capitalism? Low blow mate.

 

 

 

It essentially means a "perfect competition" which is a form of monopoly. Does free trade really mean free trade?

 

Holy jesus I barely even made it to the end of that sentence. I'm scared to read the rest of the post.

[Zierro]

It essentially means a "perfect competition" which is a form of monopoly. Does free trade really mean free trade?

 

Holy jesus I barely even made it to the end of that sentence. I'm scared to read the rest of the post.

 

 

 

I think a :roll: would suffice here!

 

 

 

;)

[Rebdragon]

No, I'm serious. I read the rest of your post and I still didn't get it. Perfect competition and monopoly are polar opposites in every meaning of the phrase. The italics of your post support that fact.

[J a m e s]

It essentially means a "perfect competition" which is a form of monopoly. Does free trade really mean free trade?

 

Holy jesus I barely even made it to the end of that sentence. I'm scared to read the rest of the post.

 

 

 

I think a :roll: would suffice here!

 

 

 

;)

 

 

 

He's right, you know. Perfect competition is nothing like monopolistic competition.

[user1991]

Rofl. We're scumbags for supporting capitalism? Low blow mate.

 

 

 

It essentially means a "perfect competition" which is a form of monopoly. Does free trade really mean free trade?

 

Holy jesus I barely even made it to the end of that sentence. I'm scared to read the rest of the post.

 

 

 

Laugh while you have the consensus.

 

 

 

There are two ways this can work out.

 

 

 

1. You guys realise how [bleep]ing stupid you are and the general consensus starts shifting to the left and we go from there.

 

 

 

2. You continue your little game, and people get tired of it. Eventually, the people who have had everything taken from them will TAKE IT BACK FROM YOU. All of it. By force.

 

 

 

Such is the nature of a class war.

 

 

 

The choice is yours.

[Rebdragon]

I'm legitimately scared. Not as a joke, I'm actually scared. Dude, if you get like this because of capitalist society, I really fear for the people around you. That's... no, communism does not work. Stop this before you actually hurt someone.

[Faux]

Perfect competition is a form of monopoly... someone give this guy a Nobel prize

 

 

 

@TheTrueNoob, look here brother, I don't have anything personal against you. But if you're willing to post opinions like that, expect people to disagree with you.

[user1991]

I'm legitimately scared. Not as a joke, I'm actually scared. Dude, if you get like this because of capitalist society, I really fear for the people around you. That's... no, communism does not work. Stop this before you actually hurt someone.

 

 

 

Since when am I a communist?

 

 

 

In fact, I'm done reasoning with people like you.

 

 

 

You're far too absorbed into your culture to understand anything other than the status quo. So whatever. There is no way I'm going to change your mind.

 

 

 

One day you'll get a taste of what it's like.

[Zierro]

Sorry did I mean oligopoly? :-#

 

 

 

You can ignore my post for now until I fix it up.

[Rebdragon]

Since when am I a communist?

 

 

 

In fact, I'm done reasoning with people like you.

 

 

 

You're far too absorbed into your culture to understand anything other than the status quo. So whatever. There is no way I'm going to change your mind.

 

 

 

One day you'll get a taste of what it's like.

 

Doubtful, comrade.

 

 

 

Or rather, judging by your sig and last few posts, anarchist?

 

Sorry did I mean oligopoly? :-#

 

 

 

You can ignore my post for now until I fix it up.

 

Zallright :) . Sorry if I beared my fangs a bit, this^ feller up here's just got me a bit on edge lol.

[Quoi_Tu]

I implied that monopolies, in the context of a capitalistic society, are bad (my main point involving greed). In technical terms, socialism is a monopoly but in my opinion it's a good one because it lacks the greed, which was my main point in the first place. So really, saying socialism is a monopoly when you know fully well what I implied doesn't hold much water at all.

 

 

 

You're assuming greed is purely capitalistic when it is, in fact, human. However, I don't care about greed when I talk about monopolies, I care about whether there is proper room and potential to develop freely and be independent. Under a socialist system the government contorls development, so the ability develop freely is greatly hindered. I like to think of socialism as a franchise. You can start your own business, but you are just a franchisee starting up an already established franchise that is controlled by the franchiser. You essentially are just a manager with minimal control over your individual franchise.

 

 

 

 

What about worker's ownership of the means of production/distribution of goods?

 

 

 

That would be a wage or salary.

 

 

 

In complete seriousness, are you intoxicated (by anything really)? Because you're becoming more and more incoherent with every post.

[fgfuyfyuiuy0]

Did anyone else besides me read this?

 

 

 

Cure for Aids?

 

 

 

They haven't done extensive testing, but it's something I guess?

[brunokiller]

Although personally, I don't want a cure to be invented.

 

 

 

Please explain so this doesn't seem so disgusting. Are you joking?

Why am I joking? While I'm sure all of us here would love to save millions of people with a cure, it has effects other than so. Most of the virus is in third world countries, who have enough trouble feeding, housing, and supporting its own people. "Saving" 20 million people will only worsen this, causing even more suffering, loss of jobs, housing space, and competition for resources and food. And even then, they would continue to have unprotected sex, as there is a less of a consequence, increasing population. Why would you want them to suffer even more?

 

 

 

It's called a carrying capacity, and many countries are con their way to reaching it.

 

 

 

Pretty much what Hitler said.

[Faux]

Hahaha, perfect. I was waiting for Godwin's Law to come into action waaay before this though

[Laura]

Although personally, I don't want a cure to be invented.

 

 

 

Please explain so this doesn't seem so disgusting. Are you joking?

Why am I joking? While I'm sure all of us here would love to save millions of people with a cure, it has effects other than so. Most of the virus is in third world countries, who have enough trouble feeding, housing, and supporting its own people. "Saving" 20 million people will only worsen this, causing even more suffering, loss of jobs, housing space, and competition for resources and food. And even then, they would continue to have unprotected sex, as there is a less of a consequence, increasing population. Why would you want them to suffer even more?

 

 

 

It's called a carrying capacity, and many countries are con their way to reaching it.

 

 

 

Pretty much what Hitler said.

 

There's a fine line between not saving people because of their actions, or actions of others and killing people. Perhaps you would like to enlighten me to my own genocidistic ways?

[l0l0lpur32]

Rofl. We're scumbags for supporting capitalism? Low blow mate.

 

 

 

It essentially means a "perfect competition" which is a form of monopoly. Does free trade really mean free trade?

 

Holy jesus I barely even made it to the end of that sentence. I'm scared to read the rest of the post.

 

 

 

Laugh while you have the consensus.

 

 

 

There are two ways this can work out.

 

 

 

1. You guys realise how [bleep] stupid you are and the general consensus starts shifting to the left and we go from there.

 

 

 

2. You continue your little game, and people get tired of it. Eventually, the people who have had everything taken from them will TAKE IT BACK FROM YOU. All of it. By force.

 

 

 

Such is the nature of a class war.

 

 

 

The choice is yours.

 

Go see a doctor or something

[EarthySun]

Although personally, I don't want a cure to be invented.

 

 

 

Please explain so this doesn't seem so disgusting. Are you joking?

 

 

 

It's an effective way of keeping the population in check. Without AIDS, population would boom. Can you imagine more people in this planet with the food crisis we're already having?

 

Wow, you're insane.

 

 

 

Even with more population, people just adapt and scientists find new ingenious ways to produce food, or introduce food rations(no more obese)! That's the best way to do it. Wishing people dead because you're afraid for yourself is cheap and cowardly. Look at japan, there are more than 128 million people on that little island, do they kill each other for space and food? No, they found all sorts of clever ways to economise space and cultivate/import food, and their culture and economy is thriving, with some of the lowest criminality rates in the world.

 

 

 

Actually, my grandmother lived in Germany during WWII. She said it was horrible.

[brunokiller]

[hide=]

Although personally, I don't want a cure to be invented.

 

 

 

Please explain so this doesn't seem so disgusting. Are you joking?

Why am I joking? While I'm sure all of us here would love to save millions of people with a cure, it has effects other than so. Most of the virus is in third world countries, who have enough trouble feeding, housing, and supporting its own people. "Saving" 20 million people will only worsen this, causing even more suffering, loss of jobs, housing space, and competition for resources and food. And even then, they would continue to have unprotected sex, as there is a less of a consequence, increasing population. Why would you want them to suffer even more?

 

 

 

It's called a carrying capacity, and many countries are con their way to reaching it.

 

 

 

Pretty much what Hitler said.

 

There's a fine line between not saving people because of their actions, or actions of others and killing people. Perhaps you would like to enlighten me to my own genocidistic ways?

[/hide]

 

Denying a group of people medical care with the intent to kill them is essentially the same as genocide.

 

 

 

 

 

Definition of genocide:

 

 

 

Article 2



   In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:



   (a) Killing members of the group;



   (B) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;



   (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; 

 

 

 

Source: http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/p_genoci.htm