New Pope Is A Commie

[Sallow]

Aside from the poison pills, you are correct, and I don't have a problem with it. "Hostile take overs" and "corporate raiding" are good for our economy. For one thing, they keep management from becoming entrenched and thereby allowing them to pay themselves 500 times what the average worker earns. I think poison pills probably violate the rights of the share holders, so I wouldn't call them part of capitalism.

And now?

You've changed your position, yet again.

When exactly do you feel embarrassed?

Or is that not a part of your makeup?

What have I changed my position on?

I think you have me confused with someone else.

In this thread..this was your original position:

Wrong. Under capitalism all transactions are entirely voluntary. Only government is allowed to use force.

That was shown to be incorrect, so you changed it.

I mean..just in the same thread.

Don't you get at all embarrassed?

 

[bripat9643]

Actually it's you who have failed to understand why he HAD to change the logic.

Capitalism is ALL about taking.

Voluntary or not.

See, this is a field I actually work in, and have for some 20 years.

Nope. Taking requires the use of force. Only government is allowed to use force to achieve its aims in this country.

No it doesn't.

ROFL! Yes it does.

Can you provide an example of taking something without using force?

 

[bripat9643]

And now?

You've changed your position, yet again.

When exactly do you feel embarrassed?

Or is that not a part of your makeup?

What have I changed my position on?

I think you have me confused with someone else.

In this thread..this was your original position:

What was my original position?

Wrong. Under capitalism all transactions are entirely voluntary. Only government is allowed to use force.

That was shown to be incorrect, so you changed it.

I mean..just in the same thread.

Don't you get at all embarrassed?

It was not shown to be incorrect and I have never changed my position on that issue.

 

[Sallow]

Yes, you are a communist. You spout Marxist dogma in virtually every post.

For the record, I have never said barter is capitalism. Save your advice from your Komrades.

This coming from a Theocrat?

Comedy gold.

I'm a "theocrat?"

That's utterly hilarious considering the fact that I'm an atheist.

Comedy gold.

What today?

You seem to forget we have a history.

You are doing a Romney.

You've stated prior that we would be better as a Monarchy. Then you've changed your "ideology" to reflect that you are anarchist (And you do understand that capitalism cannot not function in any significant way under anarchy, right?).

What is it today, Bripat?



Maybe that's why you are never embarrassed.

You're a changeling.

 

[Sallow]

What have I changed my position on?

I think you have me confused with someone else.

In this thread..this was your original position:

What was my original position?

Wrong. Under capitalism all transactions are entirely voluntary. Only government is allowed to use force.

That was shown to be incorrect, so you changed it.

I mean..just in the same thread.

Don't you get at all embarrassed?

It was not shown to be incorrect and I have never changed my position on that issue.

What wait?

Hostile takeovers and Corporate Raiding aren't voluntary transactions. Neither is the use of a poison pill.

All are valid tactics under our form of capitalism.

That destroys your point.

And even you have agreed all are used.

 

[Darkwind]

Commie???? No! but "the false prophet" talked about in the book of revelation?? maybe.===Rev 19:20 "And the beast(anti-christ) was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone."

Rev 20:10 (KJV) "And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever."

So the Pope is actually more like Jesus than any in ages but he rejects what you believe, but not what Jesus taught, and therefore he's a False Prophet? Boy would I like to be there when you meet Jesus. The Pope will be right at his side, trying very hard to laugh out loud I expect.

Jesus never advocated that governments become tyrannical and take the fruits of societal labor and redistribute it to the poor.

You really aren't very lucid, are you?

 

[Sallow]

Nope. Taking requires the use of force. Only government is allowed to use force to achieve its aims in this country.

No it doesn't.

ROFL! Yes it does.

Can you provide an example of taking something without using force?

Pickpockets don't use force.
Neither do most con artists.
Additionally most cyber crimes do not require any force whatsoever.

That's three examples.

 

[Darkwind]

In this thread..this was your original position:

What was my original position?

That was shown to be incorrect, so you changed it.

I mean..just in the same thread.

Don't you get at all embarrassed?

It was not shown to be incorrect and I have never changed my position on that issue.

What wait?

Hostile takeovers and Corporate Raiding aren't voluntary transactions. Neither is the use of a poison pill.

All are valid tactics under our form of capitalism.

That destroys your point.

And even you have agreed all are used.

You are equating a takeover as a transaction?

Wow.

 

[Sallow]

What was my original position?



It was not shown to be incorrect and I have never changed my position on that issue.

What wait?

Hostile takeovers and Corporate Raiding aren't voluntary transactions. Neither is the use of a poison pill.

All are valid tactics under our form of capitalism.

That destroys your point.

And even you have agreed all are used.

You are equating a takeover as a transaction?

Wow.

Is English your first language?

 

[bripat9643]

This coming from a Theocrat?

Comedy gold.

I'm a "theocrat?"

That's utterly hilarious considering the fact that I'm an atheist.

Comedy gold.

What today?

You seem to forget we have a history.

You are doing a Romney.

You've stated prior that we would be better as a Monarchy. Then you've changed your "ideology" to reflect that you are anarchist (And you do understand that capitalism cannot not function in any significant way under anarchy, right?).

What is it today, Bripat?



Maybe that's why you are never embarrassed.

You're a changeling.

I have always been an anarchist. That doesn't alter the fact that a monarchy would be preferable to a democracy, just as a headache would be preferable to a broken leg. Saying 'A' is better than 'B' doesn't automatically make you an advocate of 'A.'

You really have a problem with the simplest matters of logic.

Also, it's a statist myth that capitalism can't function without government. It functioned quite nicely before government ever existed.

 

[Darkwind]

What wait?

Hostile takeovers and Corporate Raiding aren't voluntary transactions. Neither is the use of a poison pill.

All are valid tactics under our form of capitalism.

That destroys your point.

And even you have agreed all are used.

You are equating a takeover as a transaction?

Wow.

Is English your first language?

Yes. Stupidity must be yours.

 

[Sallow]

I'm a "theocrat?"

That's utterly hilarious considering the fact that I'm an atheist.

Comedy gold.

What today?

You seem to forget we have a history.

You are doing a Romney.

You've stated prior that we would be better as a Monarchy. Then you've changed your "ideology" to reflect that you are anarchist (And you do understand that capitalism cannot not function in any significant way under anarchy, right?).

What is it today, Bripat?



Maybe that's why you are never embarrassed.

You're a changeling.

I have always been an anarchist. That doesn't alter the fact that a monarchy would be preferable to a democracy, just as a headache would be preferable to a broken leg. Saying 'A' is better than 'B' doesn't automatically make you an advocate of 'A.'

You really have a problem with the simplest matters of logic.

Also, it's a statist myth that capitalism can't function without government. It functioned quite nicely before government ever existed.

Well no it isn't and no it didn't.

Part and parcel with Capitalism is Currency. Currency is coined by government.

Other than that, you had something called "Barter".

And that, is what functioned without government, sometimes.

 

[bripat9643]

What wait?

Hostile takeovers and Corporate Raiding aren't voluntary transactions. Neither is the use of a poison pill.

All are valid tactics under our form of capitalism.

That destroys your point.

And even you have agreed all are used.

You are equating a takeover as a transaction?

Wow.

Is English your first language?

Actually, so-called "hostile takeovers" and "corporate raiding" are purely voluntary transactions. They both involve nothing more than buying shares of stock. No one is forced to sell their shares. Of course, the current management doesn't like it when someone buys control of the company because they're going to lose their cushy, highly paid jobs. It's only "hostile" from their perspective, but that doesn't matter because they don't own the company.

 

[Sallow]

You are equating a takeover as a transaction?

Wow.

Is English your first language?

Yes. Stupidity must be yours.

As in, you came into this thread in the middle without completely understanding what you are talking about.

It's pretty typical of you.

Schmuck.

 

[Sallow]

You are equating a takeover as a transaction?

Wow.

Is English your first language?

Actually, so-called "hostile takeovers" and "corporate raiding" are purely voluntary transactions. They both involve nothing more than buying shares of stock. No one is forced to sell their shares. Of course, the current management doesn't like it when someone buys control of the company because they're going to lose their cushy, highly paid jobs. It's only "hostile" from their perspective, but that doesn't matter because they don't own the company.

 

[bripat9643]

What today?

You seem to forget we have a history.

You are doing a Romney.

You've stated prior that we would be better as a Monarchy. Then you've changed your "ideology" to reflect that you are anarchist (And you do understand that capitalism cannot not function in any significant way under anarchy, right?).

What is it today, Bripat?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yPQn5XwW8aY

Maybe that's why you are never embarrassed.

You're a changeling.

I have always been an anarchist. That doesn't alter the fact that a monarchy would be preferable to a democracy, just as a headache would be preferable to a broken leg. Saying 'A' is better than 'B' doesn't automatically make you an advocate of 'A.'

You really have a problem with the simplest matters of logic.

Also, it's a statist myth that capitalism can't function without government. It functioned quite nicely before government ever existed.

Well no it isn't and no it didn't.

Part and parcel with Capitalism is Currency. Currency is coined by government.

Other than that, you had something called "Barter".

And that, is what functioned without government, sometimes.

Every time you post you only prove how fucking stupid and ignorant you are, currency existed long before government took it over and imposed a monopoly. In fact, in this country during the era of free banking each bank printed its own bank notes. The government did not print money.

 

[bripat9643]

Is English your first language?

Actually, so-called "hostile takeovers" and "corporate raiding" are purely voluntary transactions. They both involve nothing more than buying shares of stock. No one is forced to sell their shares. Of course, the current management doesn't like it when someone buys control of the company because they're going to lose their cushy, highly paid jobs. It's only "hostile" from their perspective, but that doesn't matter because they don't own the company.

That must be your way of saying "I have nothing to counter with."

 

[Sallow]

I have always been an anarchist. That doesn't alter the fact that a monarchy would be preferable to a democracy, just as a headache would be preferable to a broken leg. Saying 'A' is better than 'B' doesn't automatically make you an advocate of 'A.'

You really have a problem with the simplest matters of logic.

Also, it's a statist myth that capitalism can't function without government. It functioned quite nicely before government ever existed.

Well no it isn't and no it didn't.

Part and parcel with Capitalism is Currency. Currency is coined by government.

Other than that, you had something called "Barter".

And that, is what functioned without government, sometimes.

Every time you post you only prove how fucking stupid and ignorant you are, currency existed long before government took it over and imposed a monopoly. In fact, in this country during the era of free banking each bank printed its own bank notes. The government did not print money.

No it didn't.

Government in one form or another backed currency and set values.

There's a reason I work in the financial industry and you don't.

 

[Sallow]

Actually, so-called "hostile takeovers" and "corporate raiding" are purely voluntary transactions. They both involve nothing more than buying shares of stock. No one is forced to sell their shares. Of course, the current management doesn't like it when someone buys control of the company because they're going to lose their cushy, highly paid jobs. It's only "hostile" from their perspective, but that doesn't matter because they don't own the company.

That must be your way of saying "I have nothing to counter with."

What is there to say?

You are completely wrong.

 

[bripat9643]

Well no it isn't and no it didn't.

Part and parcel with Capitalism is Currency. Currency is coined by government.

Other than that, you had something called "Barter".

And that, is what functioned without government, sometimes.

Every time you post you only prove how fucking stupid and ignorant you are, currency existed long before government took it over and imposed a monopoly. In fact, in this country during the era of free banking each bank printed its own bank notes. The government did not print money.

No it didn't.

Government in one form or another backed currency and set values.

There's a reason I work in the financial industry and you don't.

Most people who work in the financial industry don't know jack squat about economics. Money existed before government. It's an historical fact. Try reading something before you spout your ignorance

History of money - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The emergence of money

Anatolian obsidian as a raw material for stone-age tools was distributed as early as 12,000 B.C., with organized trade occurring in the 9th millennium.(Cauvin;Chataigner 1998)[10] In Sardinia, one of the four main sites for sourcing the material deposits of obsidian within the Mediterranean, trade in this was replaced in the 3rd millennium by trade in copper and silver.[11][12][13][14]

As early as 9000 BC both grain and cattle were used as money or as barter (Davies) (the first grain remains found, considered to be evidence of pre-agricultural practice date to 17,000 BC).[15][16][17] The importance of grain with respect to the value of money is inherent in language where the term for a small quantity of gold was "grain of gold".[18][19]