Amen brutha, amen!
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Anybody but Palin or Romney...
- Thread starter manifold
- Start date
Amen brutha, amen!
Immanuel
Gold Member
- May 15, 2007
- 16,828
- 2,269
- 183
If the Republicans were stupid enough to Run another McCain Type, I will either vote Third Party or leave the category blank. I will Never Vote the Greater Evil.
And that is why I voted third party this time. Not to vote for Barr, because he really is not any better than McCain or Obama, but at least my vote registered as a number that was voting against one of the two major parties.
Immie
If the Republicans were stupid enough to Run another McCain Type, I will either vote Third Party or leave the category blank. I will Never Vote the Greater Evil.
And that is why I voted third party this time. Not to vote for Barr, because he really is not any better than McCain or Obama, but at least my vote registered as a number that was voting against one of the two major parties.
Immie
I've voted for more than a few Third Parties over the Years, including "The Holy Spirit" a few times as a write in. Unfortunately New York State is real Anal as far as Write-in's go.
- Banned
- #85
INTENSE WRITES: :The Money system is not stinking or rotten in itself, it is the perversion of the system that stinks. Value for value is not corrupt."
...
...
...lol!..IF YOU HONESTLY UNDERSTOOD THE HIDEOUS, INSANE, etc., ORIGIN, NATURE, etc., OF "DOLLARS," I KNOW YOU WOULDN'T MAKE NAIVE COMMENTS LIKE THE ABOVE CRAP..
...and i know you think you 'know all you need to know'..but, in REALITY, the moneychanger$ and ?your stinking republicrat congresscritters (with ultimate responsibility for oversight, etc.,) haven't even given us an honest audit!!!..EVER!!
...IT SEEMS TO ME THAT MAKING A STATEMENT THAT A SYSTEM WHICH HAS NEVER BEEN HONESTLY, INDEPENDENTLY, TRANSPARENTLY, etc., AUDITED IS 'NOT STINKING ROTTEN...' IS REALLY REALLY FUCKING NAIVE, STOOOOOOOOOOOOOPID, ETC..(?!do you republicrat monetary ignoramusses think some angelic geniuses are controlling, issuing, administering, etc..the system with YOUR best in mind?!)
(these republicrat stoooooops haven't even a clue what a stinking 'dollar' is..but ask them the latest phony republicrat telephone 'poll numbers' and these parrots will squawk them with confidence..!..STRANGE STRANGE PRIORITIES!!)
..below is as true now as it was in 1833..(republicrats, just go ahead and skip this, i know you're focused on the latest polls, circusses and mono-sodium glutamate lunch..the rest of you, have a good day!.
It was known in 1833 that corporations threatened the welfare of the nation
"Against Corporations of every kind, the objection may be brought that whatever power is given to them is so much taken from either the government or the people. As the object of charters is to give to members of companies powers which they would not possess in their individual capacity, the very existence of monied corporations is incompatible with equality of rights.
Corporations are unfavorable to the progress of national wealth. As the Argus eyes of private interest do not watch over their concerns, their affairs are much more carelessly and much more expensively conducted than those of individuals. What would be the condition of the merchant who should trust everything to his clerks, or of the farmer who should trust everything to his laborers? Corporations are obliged to trust everything to stipendiaries, who are oftentimes less trustworthy than the clerks of the merchant or the laborers of the farmer.
Such are the inherent defects of corporations that they never can succeed, except when the laws or circumstances give them a monopoly or advantages partaking of the nature of a monopoly. Sometimes they are protected by direct inhibitions to individuals to engage in the same business. Sometimes they are protected by an exemption from liabilities to which individuals are subjected. Sometimes the extent of their capital or of their credit gives them a control of the market. They cannot, even then, work as cheap as the individual trader, but they can afford to throw away enough money in the contest to ruin the individual trader, and then they have the market to themselves.
If a poor man suffers aggression from a rich man, the disproportion of power is such that it may be difficult for him to obtain redress; but if a man is aggrieved by a corporation, he may have all its stockholders, all its clerks, and all its protégés for parties against him. Corporations are so powerful as frequently to bid defiance to government.
If a man is unjust or an extortioner, society is, sooner or later, relieved from the burden by his death. But corporations never die. What is worst of all (if worse than what has already been stated be possible) is that want of moral feeling and responsibility which characterizes corporations. A celebrated English writer expressed the truth, with some roughness, but with great force, when he declared that "corporations have neither bodies to be kicked , nor souls to be damned."
All these objections apply to our American banks. They are protected, in most of the states, by directed inhibitions on individuals engaging in the same business. They are exempted from liabilities to which individuals are subjected. If a poor man cannot pay his debts, his bed is, in some of the states, taken from under him. If that will not satisfy his creditors, his body is imprisoned. The shareholders in a bank are entitled to all the gain they can make by banking operations; but if the undertaking chances to be unsuccessful, the loss falls on those who have trusted them. They are responsible only for the amount of stock they may have subscribed.
For the old standard of value, they substitute the new standard of bank credit. Would government be willing to trust to corporations the fixing of our standards and measures of length, weight, and capacity? Or are our standards and measures of value of less importance than our standards and measures of other things?
...What has always been considered one of the most important prerogatives of government has been surrendered to the banks.
In addition to their own funds, they have the whole of the spare cash of the community to work upon. The credit of every businessman depends on their not. They have it in their power to ruin any merchant to whom they may become inimical...
..Supposing banking to be a thing good in itself, why should bankers be exempted from liabilities to which farmers, manufacturers, and merchants are subjected? It will not surely be contended that banking is more conducive than agriculture, manufactures, and commerce to the progress of national wealth...
..Why should corporations have greater privileges than simple copartnerships? On what principle is it that , in a professedly republican government, immunities are conferred on individuals in a collective capacity that are refused to individuals in their separate capacity. . .
..In private credit, there is a reciprocity of burdens and of benefits. Substantial wealth is given when goods are sold, and substantial wealth is received when payment is made, and an equivalent is allowed for the time during which payment is deferred....But the banking system reverses this natural order. The interest which is due to the productive classes that receive the bank notes is paid to the banks that issue them.
If the superior credit the banks enjoy grew out of the natural order of things, it would not be a subject of complaint. But the banks owe their credit to their charters to special acts of legislation in their favor, and to their notes being made receivable in payment of dues to government. The kind of credit which is created for them by law, being equalpollent with cash in the market, enables them to transfer an equal amount of substantial wealth from the productive classes to themselves, giving the productive classes only representatives of credit or evidences of debt in return for the substantial wealth which they part with. ."
...
......lol!..IF YOU HONESTLY UNDERSTOOD THE HIDEOUS, INSANE, etc., ORIGIN, NATURE, etc., OF "DOLLARS," I KNOW YOU WOULDN'T MAKE NAIVE COMMENTS LIKE THE ABOVE CRAP..
...and i know you think you 'know all you need to know'..but, in REALITY, the moneychanger$ and ?your stinking republicrat congresscritters (with ultimate responsibility for oversight, etc.,) haven't even given us an honest audit!!!..EVER!!
...IT SEEMS TO ME THAT MAKING A STATEMENT THAT A SYSTEM WHICH HAS NEVER BEEN HONESTLY, INDEPENDENTLY, TRANSPARENTLY, etc., AUDITED IS 'NOT STINKING ROTTEN...' IS REALLY REALLY FUCKING NAIVE, STOOOOOOOOOOOOOPID, ETC..(?!do you republicrat monetary ignoramusses think some angelic geniuses are controlling, issuing, administering, etc..the system with YOUR best in mind?!)
(these republicrat stoooooops haven't even a clue what a stinking 'dollar' is..but ask them the latest phony republicrat telephone 'poll numbers' and these parrots will squawk them with confidence..!..STRANGE STRANGE PRIORITIES!!)
..below is as true now as it was in 1833..(republicrats, just go ahead and skip this, i know you're focused on the latest polls, circusses and mono-sodium glutamate lunch..the rest of you, have a good day!.
It was known in 1833 that corporations threatened the welfare of the nation
"Against Corporations of every kind, the objection may be brought that whatever power is given to them is so much taken from either the government or the people. As the object of charters is to give to members of companies powers which they would not possess in their individual capacity, the very existence of monied corporations is incompatible with equality of rights.
Corporations are unfavorable to the progress of national wealth. As the Argus eyes of private interest do not watch over their concerns, their affairs are much more carelessly and much more expensively conducted than those of individuals. What would be the condition of the merchant who should trust everything to his clerks, or of the farmer who should trust everything to his laborers? Corporations are obliged to trust everything to stipendiaries, who are oftentimes less trustworthy than the clerks of the merchant or the laborers of the farmer.
Such are the inherent defects of corporations that they never can succeed, except when the laws or circumstances give them a monopoly or advantages partaking of the nature of a monopoly. Sometimes they are protected by direct inhibitions to individuals to engage in the same business. Sometimes they are protected by an exemption from liabilities to which individuals are subjected. Sometimes the extent of their capital or of their credit gives them a control of the market. They cannot, even then, work as cheap as the individual trader, but they can afford to throw away enough money in the contest to ruin the individual trader, and then they have the market to themselves.
If a poor man suffers aggression from a rich man, the disproportion of power is such that it may be difficult for him to obtain redress; but if a man is aggrieved by a corporation, he may have all its stockholders, all its clerks, and all its protégés for parties against him. Corporations are so powerful as frequently to bid defiance to government.
If a man is unjust or an extortioner, society is, sooner or later, relieved from the burden by his death. But corporations never die. What is worst of all (if worse than what has already been stated be possible) is that want of moral feeling and responsibility which characterizes corporations. A celebrated English writer expressed the truth, with some roughness, but with great force, when he declared that "corporations have neither bodies to be kicked , nor souls to be damned."
All these objections apply to our American banks. They are protected, in most of the states, by directed inhibitions on individuals engaging in the same business. They are exempted from liabilities to which individuals are subjected. If a poor man cannot pay his debts, his bed is, in some of the states, taken from under him. If that will not satisfy his creditors, his body is imprisoned. The shareholders in a bank are entitled to all the gain they can make by banking operations; but if the undertaking chances to be unsuccessful, the loss falls on those who have trusted them. They are responsible only for the amount of stock they may have subscribed.
For the old standard of value, they substitute the new standard of bank credit. Would government be willing to trust to corporations the fixing of our standards and measures of length, weight, and capacity? Or are our standards and measures of value of less importance than our standards and measures of other things?
...What has always been considered one of the most important prerogatives of government has been surrendered to the banks.
In addition to their own funds, they have the whole of the spare cash of the community to work upon. The credit of every businessman depends on their not. They have it in their power to ruin any merchant to whom they may become inimical...
..Supposing banking to be a thing good in itself, why should bankers be exempted from liabilities to which farmers, manufacturers, and merchants are subjected? It will not surely be contended that banking is more conducive than agriculture, manufactures, and commerce to the progress of national wealth...
..Why should corporations have greater privileges than simple copartnerships? On what principle is it that , in a professedly republican government, immunities are conferred on individuals in a collective capacity that are refused to individuals in their separate capacity. . .
..In private credit, there is a reciprocity of burdens and of benefits. Substantial wealth is given when goods are sold, and substantial wealth is received when payment is made, and an equivalent is allowed for the time during which payment is deferred....But the banking system reverses this natural order. The interest which is due to the productive classes that receive the bank notes is paid to the banks that issue them.
If the superior credit the banks enjoy grew out of the natural order of things, it would not be a subject of complaint. But the banks owe their credit to their charters to special acts of legislation in their favor, and to their notes being made receivable in payment of dues to government. The kind of credit which is created for them by law, being equalpollent with cash in the market, enables them to transfer an equal amount of substantial wealth from the productive classes to themselves, giving the productive classes only representatives of credit or evidences of debt in return for the substantial wealth which they part with. ."
- Aug 4, 2009
- 280,374
- 138,134
- 2,300
INTENSE WRITES: :The Money system is not stinking or rotten in itself, it is the perversion of the system that stinks. Value for value is not corrupt."
...
...lol!..IF YOU HONESTLY UNDERSTOOD THE HIDEOUS, INSANE, etc., ORIGIN, NATURE, etc., OF "DOLLARS," I KNOW YOU WOULDN'T MAKE NAIVE COMMENTS LIKE THE ABOVE CRAP..
...and i know you think you 'know all you need to know'..but, in REALITY, the moneychanger$ and ?your stinking republicrat congresscritters (with ultimate responsibility for oversight, etc.,) haven't even given us an honest audit!!!..EVER!!
...IT SEEMS TO ME THAT MAKING A STATEMENT THAT A SYSTEM WHICH HAS NEVER BEEN HONESTLY, INDEPENDENTLY, TRANSPARENTLY, etc., AUDITED IS 'NOT STINKING ROTTEN...' IS REALLY REALLY FUCKING NAIVE, STOOOOOOOOOOOOOPID, ETC..(?!do you republicrat monetary ignoramusses think some angelic geniuses are controlling, issuing, administering, etc..the system with YOUR best in mind?!)
(these republicrat stoooooops haven't even a clue what a stinking 'dollar' is..but ask them the latest phony republicrat telephone 'poll numbers' and these parrots will squawk them with confidence..!..STRANGE STRANGE PRIORITIES!!)
..below is as true now as it was in 1833..(republicrats, just go ahead and skip this, i know you're focused on the latest polls, circusses and mono-sodium glutamate lunch..the rest of you, have a good day!.
It was known in 1833 that corporations threatened the welfare of the nation
"Against Corporations of every kind, the objection may be brought that whatever power is given to them is so much taken from either the government or the people. As the object of charters is to give to members of companies powers which they would not possess in their individual capacity, the very existence of monied corporations is incompatible with equality of rights.
Corporations are unfavorable to the progress of national wealth. As the Argus eyes of private interest do not watch over their concerns, their affairs are much more carelessly and much more expensively conducted than those of individuals. What would be the condition of the merchant who should trust everything to his clerks, or of the farmer who should trust everything to his laborers? Corporations are obliged to trust everything to stipendiaries, who are oftentimes less trustworthy than the clerks of the merchant or the laborers of the farmer.
Such are the inherent defects of corporations that they never can succeed, except when the laws or circumstances give them a monopoly or advantages partaking of the nature of a monopoly. Sometimes they are protected by direct inhibitions to individuals to engage in the same business. Sometimes they are protected by an exemption from liabilities to which individuals are subjected. Sometimes the extent of their capital or of their credit gives them a control of the market. They cannot, even then, work as cheap as the individual trader, but they can afford to throw away enough money in the contest to ruin the individual trader, and then they have the market to themselves.
If a poor man suffers aggression from a rich man, the disproportion of power is such that it may be difficult for him to obtain redress; but if a man is aggrieved by a corporation, he may have all its stockholders, all its clerks, and all its protégés for parties against him. Corporations are so powerful as frequently to bid defiance to government.
If a man is unjust or an extortioner, society is, sooner or later, relieved from the burden by his death. But corporations never die. What is worst of all (if worse than what has already been stated be possible) is that want of moral feeling and responsibility which characterizes corporations. A celebrated English writer expressed the truth, with some roughness, but with great force, when he declared that "corporations have neither bodies to be kicked , nor souls to be damned."
All these objections apply to our American banks. They are protected, in most of the states, by directed inhibitions on individuals engaging in the same business. They are exempted from liabilities to which individuals are subjected. If a poor man cannot pay his debts, his bed is, in some of the states, taken from under him. If that will not satisfy his creditors, his body is imprisoned. The shareholders in a bank are entitled to all the gain they can make by banking operations; but if the undertaking chances to be unsuccessful, the loss falls on those who have trusted them. They are responsible only for the amount of stock they may have subscribed.
For the old standard of value, they substitute the new standard of bank credit. Would government be willing to trust to corporations the fixing of our standards and measures of length, weight, and capacity? Or are our standards and measures of value of less importance than our standards and measures of other things?
...What has always been considered one of the most important prerogatives of government has been surrendered to the banks.
In addition to their own funds, they have the whole of the spare cash of the community to work upon. The credit of every businessman depends on their not. They have it in their power to ruin any merchant to whom they may become inimical...
..Supposing banking to be a thing good in itself, why should bankers be exempted from liabilities to which farmers, manufacturers, and merchants are subjected? It will not surely be contended that banking is more conducive than agriculture, manufactures, and commerce to the progress of national wealth...
..Why should corporations have greater privileges than simple copartnerships? On what principle is it that , in a professedly republican government, immunities are conferred on individuals in a collective capacity that are refused to individuals in their separate capacity. . .
..In private credit, there is a reciprocity of burdens and of benefits. Substantial wealth is given when goods are sold, and substantial wealth is received when payment is made, and an equivalent is allowed for the time during which payment is deferred....But the banking system reverses this natural order. The interest which is due to the productive classes that receive the bank notes is paid to the banks that issue them.
If the superior credit the banks enjoy grew out of the natural order of things, it would not be a subject of complaint. But the banks owe their credit to their charters to special acts of legislation in their favor, and to their notes being made receivable in payment of dues to government. The kind of credit which is created for them by law, being equalpollent with cash in the market, enables them to transfer an equal amount of substantial wealth from the productive classes to themselves, giving the productive classes only representatives of credit or evidences of debt in return for the substantial wealth which they part with. ."
Too Long- Didn't read
INTENSE WRITES: :The Money system is not stinking or rotten in itself, it is the perversion of the system that stinks. Value for value is not corrupt."
...
...lol!..IF YOU HONESTLY UNDERSTOOD THE HIDEOUS, INSANE, etc., ORIGIN, NATURE, etc., OF "DOLLARS," I KNOW YOU WOULDN'T MAKE NAIVE COMMENTS LIKE THE ABOVE CRAP..
...and i know you think you 'know all you need to know'..but, in REALITY, the moneychanger$ and ?your stinking republicrat congresscritters (with ultimate responsibility for oversight, etc.,) haven't even given us an honest audit!!!..EVER!!
...IT SEEMS TO ME THAT MAKING A STATEMENT THAT A SYSTEM WHICH HAS NEVER BEEN HONESTLY, INDEPENDENTLY, TRANSPARENTLY, etc., AUDITED IS 'NOT STINKING ROTTEN...' IS REALLY REALLY FUCKING NAIVE, STOOOOOOOOOOOOOPID, ETC..(?!do you republicrat monetary ignoramusses think some angelic geniuses are controlling, issuing, administering, etc..the system with YOUR best in mind?!)
(these republicrat stoooooops haven't even a clue what a stinking 'dollar' is..but ask them the latest phony republicrat telephone 'poll numbers' and these parrots will squawk them with confidence..!..STRANGE STRANGE PRIORITIES!!)
..below is as true now as it was in 1833..(republicrats, just go ahead and skip this, i know you're focused on the latest polls, circusses and mono-sodium glutamate lunch..the rest of you, have a good day!.
It was known in 1833 that corporations threatened the welfare of the nation
"Against Corporations of every kind, the objection may be brought that whatever power is given to them is so much taken from either the government or the people. As the object of charters is to give to members of companies powers which they would not possess in their individual capacity, the very existence of monied corporations is incompatible with equality of rights.
Corporations are unfavorable to the progress of national wealth. As the Argus eyes of private interest do not watch over their concerns, their affairs are much more carelessly and much more expensively conducted than those of individuals. What would be the condition of the merchant who should trust everything to his clerks, or of the farmer who should trust everything to his laborers? Corporations are obliged to trust everything to stipendiaries, who are oftentimes less trustworthy than the clerks of the merchant or the laborers of the farmer.
Such are the inherent defects of corporations that they never can succeed, except when the laws or circumstances give them a monopoly or advantages partaking of the nature of a monopoly. Sometimes they are protected by direct inhibitions to individuals to engage in the same business. Sometimes they are protected by an exemption from liabilities to which individuals are subjected. Sometimes the extent of their capital or of their credit gives them a control of the market. They cannot, even then, work as cheap as the individual trader, but they can afford to throw away enough money in the contest to ruin the individual trader, and then they have the market to themselves.
If a poor man suffers aggression from a rich man, the disproportion of power is such that it may be difficult for him to obtain redress; but if a man is aggrieved by a corporation, he may have all its stockholders, all its clerks, and all its protégés for parties against him. Corporations are so powerful as frequently to bid defiance to government.
If a man is unjust or an extortioner, society is, sooner or later, relieved from the burden by his death. But corporations never die. What is worst of all (if worse than what has already been stated be possible) is that want of moral feeling and responsibility which characterizes corporations. A celebrated English writer expressed the truth, with some roughness, but with great force, when he declared that "corporations have neither bodies to be kicked , nor souls to be damned."
All these objections apply to our American banks. They are protected, in most of the states, by directed inhibitions on individuals engaging in the same business. They are exempted from liabilities to which individuals are subjected. If a poor man cannot pay his debts, his bed is, in some of the states, taken from under him. If that will not satisfy his creditors, his body is imprisoned. The shareholders in a bank are entitled to all the gain they can make by banking operations; but if the undertaking chances to be unsuccessful, the loss falls on those who have trusted them. They are responsible only for the amount of stock they may have subscribed.
For the old standard of value, they substitute the new standard of bank credit. Would government be willing to trust to corporations the fixing of our standards and measures of length, weight, and capacity? Or are our standards and measures of value of less importance than our standards and measures of other things?
...What has always been considered one of the most important prerogatives of government has been surrendered to the banks.
In addition to their own funds, they have the whole of the spare cash of the community to work upon. The credit of every businessman depends on their not. They have it in their power to ruin any merchant to whom they may become inimical...
..Supposing banking to be a thing good in itself, why should bankers be exempted from liabilities to which farmers, manufacturers, and merchants are subjected? It will not surely be contended that banking is more conducive than agriculture, manufactures, and commerce to the progress of national wealth...
..Why should corporations have greater privileges than simple copartnerships? On what principle is it that , in a professedly republican government, immunities are conferred on individuals in a collective capacity that are refused to individuals in their separate capacity. . .
..In private credit, there is a reciprocity of burdens and of benefits. Substantial wealth is given when goods are sold, and substantial wealth is received when payment is made, and an equivalent is allowed for the time during which payment is deferred....But the banking system reverses this natural order. The interest which is due to the productive classes that receive the bank notes is paid to the banks that issue them.
If the superior credit the banks enjoy grew out of the natural order of things, it would not be a subject of complaint. But the banks owe their credit to their charters to special acts of legislation in their favor, and to their notes being made receivable in payment of dues to government. The kind of credit which is created for them by law, being equalpollent with cash in the market, enables them to transfer an equal amount of substantial wealth from the productive classes to themselves, giving the productive classes only representatives of credit or evidences of debt in return for the substantial wealth which they part with. ."
What You are referring to is the Unholy Alliance Tag team that is Government and Big Business feeding of of Society, one Individual at a time, not Value for Value. Your logic is derailed Comrade.
- Banned
- #89
What You are referring to is the Unholy Alliance Tag team that is Government and Big Business feeding of (sic) of Society, one Individual at a time, not Value for Value.
..WHAT I'M TRYING TO POINT OUT IS THAT 'OUR' STINKING "MONEY (issuance, etc.) SYSTEM" IS A FRAUD..AND THAT IT IS A/THE PRIMARY EVIL IN SOCIETY..ALWAYS HAS BEEN..AND THAT YOU REPUBLICRATS ARE WORSE THAN CLUELESS ABOUT EVEN THE BASICS OF 'THE SYSTEM'..
..btw, shaddup about 'value'..it is always subjective and impossible to quantify using an apparently debauched unit of account like 'dollars'..
(i.e. what's the 'dollar value' of a glass of clear mountain water if you live on a clear mountain stream?..now what's the 'dollar value' of that same water if you're real thirsty and lost in a desert?)
..WHAT I'M TRYING TO POINT OUT IS THAT 'OUR' STINKING "MONEY (issuance, etc.) SYSTEM" IS A FRAUD..AND THAT IT IS A/THE PRIMARY EVIL IN SOCIETY..ALWAYS HAS BEEN..AND THAT YOU REPUBLICRATS ARE WORSE THAN CLUELESS ABOUT EVEN THE BASICS OF 'THE SYSTEM'..
..btw, shaddup about 'value'..it is always subjective and impossible to quantify using an apparently debauched unit of account like 'dollars'..
(i.e. what's the 'dollar value' of a glass of clear mountain water if you live on a clear mountain stream?..now what's the 'dollar value' of that same water if you're real thirsty and lost in a desert?)
What You are referring to is the Unholy Alliance Tag team that is Government and Big Business feeding of (sic) of Society, one Individual at a time, not Value for Value.
..WHAT I'M TRYING TO POINT OUT IS THAT 'OUR' STINKING "MONEY (issuance, etc.) SYSTEM" IS A FRAUD..AND THAT IT IS A/THE PRIMARY EVIL IN SOCIETY..ALWAYS HAS BEEN..AND THAT YOU REPUBLICRATS ARE WORSE THAN CLUELESS ABOUT EVEN THE BASICS OF 'THE SYSTEM'..
..btw, shaddup about 'value'..it is always subjective and impossible to quantify using an apparently debauched unit of account like 'dollars'..
(i.e. what's the 'dollar value' of a glass of clear mountain water if you live on a clear mountain stream?..now what's the 'dollar value' of that same water if you're real thirsty and lost in a desert?)
Predators like You belong in cages. I know that is really hard for Totalitarian Fucks like You to understand the concept of Private Property or Individual Right's So I will state bluntly that there are Laws against What You subscribe to Slime Bucket that You are. Value for Value, is a voluntary transaction which all relevant sides agree to. It is You that need the force of a gun, a Law, a Prison, or Forfeit, to exact Your Due, which You would otherwise not receive a Penney for, because it is valueless. You are the Fraud Dip Shit. Force and misrepresentation are all you have limp dick.
Your understanding of Business is pathetic, based on your example, You should stay with Government work. Your diaper stinks, change it, or move down wind, shit for brains.
Similar threads
- Replies
- 28
- Views
- 262
- Replies
- 41
- Views
- 432
- Replies
- 74
- Views
- 760
Latest Discussions
- Replies
- 26
- Views
- 131
- Replies
- 36
- Views
- 143
- Replies
- 10
- Views
- 27
- Replies
- 811
- Views
- 7K
- Replies
- 130
- Views
- 857
Forum List
-
-
-
-
-
Political Satire 7999
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ObamaCare 781
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Member Usernotes 465
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-