Let's try this again: I'm a hyper-capitalist, AMA, or come debate me - Page 2 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Workers of the world, unite! Then argue about Trotsky and Stalin for all eternity...
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15009714
Scrooge McDuck wrote:Recently I've made a thread with a similar headline. That thread got removed. I guess truth has to be compromised for political correctness. Being ignorant and weak is more important than debating and finding truth. But hey, I'm a guest here, so I don't make the rules.

I can't remember exactly what I wrote as an introduction in my first post, so I'll kinda sum few of my ideas.

Capitalism is the best economic system that we have at the moment. But, that is not enough. The existence of communism (late socialism) is proof that something is not fully right with capitalism itself. The solution to this is to double down on capitalism, into hyper-capitalism.

Communism is a system designed to destroy economies of nations. I believe that the designers and implementers of that systems are Aliens from another dimension whose goal is to put Earth under their own rule. Some of those Aliens were Karl Marx, Lenin, Trotsky, Rosa Luxemburg, Jacob Schiff, Sigmund Freud, and so on...
Just be sure I don't get banned, by Aliens I most definitely DO NOT mean Jews. It's just a coincidence. Jews are wonderful people who never did, or would, hurt anyone and we must protect them at all cost. It's the Aliens, who are the problem. That's just my theory.

The cost of something is determined by market and individually as a contract between a seller and a buyer. (this is a deal breaker for Marxists economics)

Capital is anything one can use the advance their own interest.

Wealth is good, poverty is evil and of Satan. God wants you to be rich, not poor. Rich people go to heaven, poor people suffer and die in poverty (aka Hell).

And so on, and so on...


What sort of experience do you have in hyper-capitalism? 8)
#15010675
Rancid wrote:I hope you agree that the most noble thing any human can do is accumulate as much money as possible.

One look at the super-duper uber-rich will dispel that notion. Consider Richard Fuld, the bankster who took hundreds of millions from Lehman just before it collapsed: a man so completely evil, he actually looks like Voldemort:

https://www.forbes.com/lists/2008/12/le ... _A9P0.html
#15011282
Rancid wrote:Any means necessarily to accumulate more money. This is noble and just.

Steve took me to task for not having a sense of sarcasm, so I don't know if I should respond to this obvious nonsense or not. There is nothing noble or just about accumulating money by inflicting injustice on others. I'd have thought that much was self-evident and indisputable.
#15011734
Rancid wrote:@Scrooge McDuck,
How do you feel about the fact that Scrooge McDuck isn't actually that much of an asshole. In many Duck Tales episodes, I think he often will value his friends and family more than his wealth.

The thing with wealth and wealthy people is that because they understand how money works, they also understand the weaknesses of it as well. There are plenty of things which money can't buy. And there are plenty of things which money can buy. Both good and bad.


Truth To Power wrote:Steve took me to task for not having a sense of sarcasm, so I don't know if I should respond to this obvious nonsense or not. There is nothing noble or just about accumulating money by inflicting injustice on others. I'd have thought that much was self-evident and indisputable.

Well, let me just dispute that real quick.
There is plenty of noble and just in accumulating capital, even at the expense of others (which I do not endorse). The strong have the right to exploit the weak. It's the responsibility of the weak to not allow that, but then they wouldn't be weak, would they?


SSDR wrote:@Rancid,

That would be in a capitalist economy, or at least any economy where currency, debt, and the concepts of value exist. That is out of a socialist context, thus making your statement as opinionated.

Value of something is measured in its survival power. No living organism can create a system not based upon value (values).


Truth To Power wrote:One look at the super-duper uber-rich will dispel that notion. Consider Richard Fuld, the bankster who took hundreds of millions from Lehman just before it collapsed: a man so completely evil, he actually looks like Voldemort:

https://www.forbes.com/lists/2008/12/le ... _A9P0.html

What about Andrew Carnegie, Henry Ford, Elon Musk, Warren Buffett, and so on...


Rancid wrote:I hope you agree that the most noble thing any human can do is accumulate as much money as possible.

Not the noblest, but very very close to it.


SSDR wrote:@Red_Army,

lmfaoooooo they sound like a capitalist fucker of whom has so much ignorance in their mind. I mean wtf says that "poor people go to hell?" There is no hell, but they're too dumb to realize that.

If there is no Hell and if poor people are not in it, then why are they the ones who suffer the most?


Suntzu wrote:What sort of experience do you have in hyper-capitalism? 8)

Unemployed kind 8)


Rich wrote:Our current societies are not Capitalist. This is a filthy Marxist lie. Capitalists do not rule. Obviously each individual rich person has more power and influence on average than an individual poor person. But our societies, even the United States, go to huge efforts to assist the power and opportunities of the poor and to offset the power and privilege of the poor citizens. Even though I would like to see greater efforts, such as yearly elections, universal food stamps and universal housing allowances. Republican Rome could be described as Capitalist, perhaps Britain before the 1832 Reform act, but no modern western society.

I am anti Communist and anti Libertarian. Libertarians are hypocrites by definition because private property is a form of collectivism. Private property is the collective granting of privileges of monopoly use of property, backed up by force. We see the nature of private property most nakedly exposed in Israel / Palestine. The Israeli state grants one set of property privileges backed up by the threat of force, a Palestine or Arab state would recognise a completely different set of property privileges, which it would back up by the threat of force.

The idea of objective property or objective non-aggression is a filthy libertarian lie. The Zionists stole the land, or at least a large part of it from the Arabs. The Muslims stole it from the Christians. The Romans stole it from the Greeks. The Greeks stole it from the Israelites. The Israelites stole it from the Canaanites and the land had no doubt been stolen numerous times before in its at least one hundred thousand years of homo sapien occupation.

Listen to this guy. He knows what he's talking about.
I agree with almost all he said here.
I would just add that the land is not stolen, but conquered. If one can not protect the land for itself, it does not belong to them in the first place. The ownership of anything, especially land, is measured by ones power (read control) over it.


ingliz wrote:«Refeudalisierung der Gesellschaft»

Sooo...

Hyper-capitalism = Anarcho-Capitalism = Neo-feudalism/corporate tyranny.


:lol:

No.


Rancid wrote:Sooo...

Hyper-capitalism = Anarcho-Capitalism?

Please, show some respect.
Anarcho-x is controlled opposition.
To acquire substantial amounts of wealth some kind of planned organization is necessary. Be it a state, or something else.


[KS mod note: several posts back to back.

Do not make separate posts for each reply please.]
#15011750
I'm opposed to pretty much everything you stand for, @The Goldpill , but I have to make a few comments that might please you although that is certainly not my intent.

First of all, almost everything you have stated about Capitalism, wealth, the Rich, and the State, etc.. Is the belief of pretty much every single true Capitalist in the World, every truly Rich person there is, at heart. It cannot be denied, and you are the honest true product of the system that you unabashedly defend and promote.

And my second point is this; at the end of the day, you my friend are the genuine enemy of Christianity, that is, the Truth, and you will find that the days of your vampiric cannibal feasting on the labor of the Poor Man, the Worker who creates all value with his sweat and blood and tears, those days are coming to an end.
#15011816
annatar1914 wrote:I'm opposed to pretty much everything you stand for, @The Goldpill , but I have to make a few comments that might please you although that is certainly not my intent.

You need to swallow the goldpill. It's not an easy task. But, it's worth it. Once you do so, you'll see the truth and beauty in my words.

annatar1914 wrote:First of all, almost everything you have stated about Capitalism, wealth, the Rich, and the State, etc.. Is the belief of pretty much every single true Capitalist in the World, every truly Rich person there is, at heart. It cannot be denied, and you are the honest true product of the system that you unabashedly defend and promote.

Yes, the wealth is the product of man's mind. A mind corrupted with ideas of poverty can never accumulate wealth.
And I'm not a product of a system, that system is the product of my ideas. Or better, of God's idea. For we only follow his path, his truth.
All the so called "communist leaders" are aware of this and are playing the exact same game as we are. Make no mistake. There is plenty of money to be made in stealing and killing, like in communism. "WE MUST CEASE THE MEANS OF REPRODUCTION!!" Lmao...

annatar1914 wrote:And my second point is this; at the end of the day, you my friend are the genuine enemy of Christianity, that is, the Truth, and you will find that the days of your vampiric cannibal feasting on the labor of the Poor Man, the Worker who creates all value with his sweat and blood and tears, those days are coming to an end.

"Please allow me to introduce myself. I'm a man of wealth and taste". Come on man, show some sympathy.
My days might be outnumbered, but the ideas will live on. They are eternal. Because they align with nature itself, and so we can not be the enemy of Christianity, the enemy of God. I am, however, the enemy of slave morality. Somehow, the mainstream Christianity got corrupted with certain ideas of moral weakness. Ideas which were never spoken by Jesus.
If The Rich, are the enemy of God, why did the God make it so that "Whoever has will be given more, and they will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what they have will be taken from them." This is the Law of Accumulation.
The labor of a worker is always fairly valued, for the worker in a capitalist system sells his own labor for the highest amount he can get.
Worker does not create all the value. Most workers do not even work hard. Those who work hard, are payed more, because they can ask and get more. And somehow, for some reason, you put a blind eye for the sweat, blood and tears of an owner. Most of whom work 16 hours a day, on easy days.
#15011820
The Goldpill wrote:If The Rich, are the enemy of God, why did the God make it so

There is no God.

Almost a quote because I can't be arsed wasting my time to write what is self evident.

There is no evidence to support any of the claims made in the Bible concerning the existence of a god... The Bible is not self-authenticating; it is simply one of many religious texts.

Like those other texts, it itself constitutes no evidence for the existence of a god. Its florid prose and fanciful content do not legitimise it nor distinguish it from other ancient works of literature.

Furthermore, the Bible is historically inaccurate, factually incorrect, inconsistent and contradictory. It was artificially constructed by a group of men in antiquity and is poorly translated, heavily altered and selectively interpreted. Entire sections of the text have been redacted over time.
#15011838
ingliz wrote:There is no God.

Almost a quote because I can't be arsed wasting my time to write what is self evident.

There is no evidence to support any of the claims made in the Bible concerning the existence of a god... The Bible is not self-authenticating; it is simply one of many religious texts.

Like those other texts, it itself constitutes no evidence for the existence of a god. Its florid prose and fanciful content do not legitimise it nor distinguish it from other ancient works of literature.

Furthermore, the Bible is historically inaccurate, factually incorrect, inconsistent and contradictory. It was artificially constructed by a group of men in antiquity and is poorly translated, heavily altered and selectively interpreted. Entire sections of the text have been redacted over time.

That's cute.
There most definitely is a God.
Only life can create life. Something can not come out of nothing.
#15011848
The Goldpill wrote:Something

Wrong!

The positive energy of the matter is exactly balanced by the negative energy of the gravitational field.

The universe consists of essentially nothing - Net energy in the Universe is 0.

½MV2 – MgH = 0

"Quantum uncertainty allows the temporary creation of bubbles of energy, or pairs of particles (such as electron-positron pairs) out of nothing, provided that they disappear in a short time. The less energy is involved, the longer the bubble can exist. Curiously, the energy in a gravitational field is negative, while the energy locked up in matter is positive. If the universe is exactly flat*, then as Tryon pointed out the two numbers cancel out, and the overall energy of the universe is precisely zero. In that case, the quantum rules allow it to last forever."

John Gribbin, Inflation for Beginners, Berkeley Lab, Smoot Group


* The flatness parameter (O) is defined in such a way that if spacetime is exactly flat then O = 1.

If the Universe starts out with the parameter less than one, O gets smaller as the Universe ages, while if it starts out bigger than one O gets bigger as the Universe ages. The fact that O is between 0.1 and 1 today means that in the first second of the Big Bang it was precisely 1 to within 1 part in 10^{60}. This makes the value of the density parameter in the beginning one of the most precisely determined numbers in all of science, and the natural inference is that the value is, and always has been, exactly 1.


:)
#15011852
ingliz wrote:Wrong!

The positive energy of the matter is exactly balanced by the negative energy of the gravitational field.

The universe consists of essentially nothing - Net energy in the Universe is 0.

½MV2 – MgH = 0

"Quantum uncertainty allows the temporary creation of bubbles of energy, or pairs of particles (such as electron-positron pairs) out of nothing, provided that they disappear in a short time. The less energy is involved, the longer the bubble can exist. Curiously, the energy in a gravitational field is negative, while the energy locked up in matter is positive. If the universe is exactly flat*, then as Tryon pointed out the two numbers cancel out, and the overall energy of the universe is precisely zero. In that case, the quantum rules allow it to last forever."

John Gribbin, Inflation for Beginners, Berkeley Lab, Smoot Group


* The flatness parameter (O) is defined in such a way that if spacetime is exactly flat then O = 1.

If the Universe starts out with the parameter less than one, O gets smaller as the Universe ages, while if it starts out bigger than one O gets bigger as the Universe ages. The fact that O is between 0.1 and 1 today means that in the first second of the Big Bang it was precisely 1 to within 1 part in 10^{60}. This makes the value of the density parameter in the beginning one of the most precisely determined numbers in all of science, and the natural inference is that the value is, and always has been, exactly 1.


:)

That's amazing man. God truly is magnificent.
Universe is also constructed out of logic and math, and one is yet to measure the energy of numbers and equations.
#15011856
The Goldpill wrote:God truly is magnificent.

God is redundant, unnecessary, not required, inessential, unessential, needless, unneeded, uncalled for, dispensable, disposable, expendable, unwanted, useless...


:)
#15011865
The Goldpill wrote:No

Believe what you want. The only reason we could have for believing in God would be that it was necessary to postulate his existence to account for some observed fact or facts. But science can explain everything we observe, and its explanations do not appeal to God or to any other supernatural agency. Hence, there is no reason to believe that God exists. That is to say, the existence of God is an unnecessary hypothesis.


:)
Last edited by ingliz on 13 Jun 2019 19:51, edited 1 time in total.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 8

Yes, I did, and you know it. See the title of th[…]

I refuted your claim, and provided the source. […]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymaWq5yZIYM Hol[…]

Trump and Russiagate

I hope all is well that sounds great we have lots[…]