Forum - View topicHey, Answerman! [2008-01-18]
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 Next Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ric4001
 Posts: 16 Location: The Red House Over Yonder |
|
|||||
|
It is that because everyone who isn't a libertarian isn't a Hitler or Stalin. I'm going for Obama too, but I most definitely am not a wannabe dictator. And I'm sorry ,Steroid, if that's not what you mean, but it sure as hell sounds like it, so don't accuse me of "taking it out of context."
Sorry if that offends anyone, by the way. Last edited by ric4001 on Fri Jan 18, 2008 9:26 pm; edited 1 time in total |
||||||
|
||||||
lijakaca
 Posts: 37 Location: Toronto, CA |
|
|||||
Define this please. If you're referring to the concept of a meritocracy, then I don't agree with you.
Are you trying to refer to inertia here? That when people get rich, they tend to stay rich or get richer, and vice versa? Because the way you state it sounds wrong, as "economic prosperity no matter who you are" is a good thing. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Rawshark
Posts: 28 |
|
|||||
steroid you're the poster boy of retarded logic of libertarian fanatics with their habit of painting issues into black and white arguments. "Hey my car has a flat tire so it's bad. Time for a new car!" Please stop and think how stupid you're acting before you actually influence another moron. |
||||||
|
||||||
Steroid
 Posts: 329 Location: At home, where all good hikikomori should be |
|
|||||
That is what I'm referring to: a meritocracy, where merit is definied by what people are willing to pay for. That means if I'm only willing to pay $2/hour for someone to do work, that I'm allowed to offer that. And that if someone is willing to take that job, that no one stops me from hiring him. And if I offer my product or service to people and they buy in such quantities to make me a billion dollars, I'm allowed to keep that billion, not have it taken by force to give back to the people who paid it to me, solely on the grounds that they're poorer. Rawshark: if I compromise my arguments with those who disagree with me, how does that help advance what I think is right? |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Rawshark
Posts: 28 |
|
|||||
it's not about people disagreeing. it's about how ridiculous extreme libertarian policies don't work in real world scenarios. communism was great idea on paper where it uses imaginary people. not so great on real people. right now china isn't compromising it's communist ideology, it's fine tuning because people always f--k up every ideology and so far china is doing a lot better than it was two decades ago (of course it's not perfect). Last edited by Rawshark on Fri Jan 18, 2008 8:04 pm; edited 1 time in total |
||||||
|
||||||
Meccanica
 Posts: 101 Location: Brookline, MA |
|
|||||
No, it's because of Godwin's law. ("As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one.") The idea that someone who does not share your chosen (or any particular) ideology is the equivalent of Hitler is, to put it one way, loony. To put it a nicer way, it's rationally unsound. A 'monstrous evil?' Most certainly not. In fact, that's pretty much the totalitarian way of thinking. I'll say it again. That assertion is a fallacy, and one that has been abused many many many times. Argumentum ad Hitlerum and whatnot. The whole point of Godwin's law is, according to Godwin (via wikipedia...), that "overuse of Nazi and Hitler comparisons should be avoided, because it robs the valid comparisons of their impact." Similarly, it kind of robs whatever else you say of credibility as well. Ugh... I'm violating two of my principles, here... 1) don't feed trolls, and 2) excersize the counterpart to free speech, the right to ignore it. Edit: this is getting to be a very well fed troll, too... |
||||||
|
||||||
MokonaModoki
 Posts: 437 Location: Austin, Texas |
|
|||||
Perhaps by coming across as less of a jingo-spewing anarcho-capitalist completely out of touch with reality so that people might have a chance to comprehend an underlying philosophy that doesn't sound completely deranged? Not generating the collateral damage of contributing to the perception of those with merely consequentialist libertarian bents as deranged loons would be a nice bonus too. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
lijakaca
Posts: 37 Location: Toronto, CA |
|
|||||
Um, if you're opposed to this, and would rather forcibly take money that someone has because their service/product happened to be popular, isn't that communism? And I'm not getting into whether communism is right or wrong, I really don't care to hash it out here, but why don't you call yourself that instead of this "libertarian" something-or-other? At least if you said that in the first place, I wouldn't have bothered arguing with you. We believe in different 'good's. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Meccanica
Posts: 101 Location: Brookline, MA |
|
|||||
|
lijakaca: No, I think he's going for exactly the opposite. No matter how you manage to acquire your moneys, you acquired them, darnit! and no-one can take any of it away from you.
It's got a lot of things in common with communism, though, in that it works in theory, and would probably never actually work in real life, ever. I was gonna continue to argue the point, but instead I'm going to ask a favor: please, somebody, talk about something else. If there isn't anything else left to talk about, end the discussion entirely. Please. One common application of Godwin's law is to say that whoever invokes Hitler or the Nazis first automatically loses the argument and the discussion ends. Now I see the reason for it. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
ric4001
Posts: 16 Location: The Red House Over Yonder |
|
|||||
|
I'll see to meccanica's request. What's the new topic? Perhaps it may have something to do with Answerman. I'll let you decide. It'll be a democracy!
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
ANN_Bamboo
ANN Contributor
 Posts: 3904 Location: CO |
|
|||||
You, sir, are wrong. Think about the implications of this: You have a job that needs to be done. You're offering $2/hr. Most people would refuse that, but along comes someone who desperately needs that money, so they take the job. Okay, both parties win, right? Wrong. Because you were able to get away with only paying $2/hr, you continue to do so. And more desperate people take the job. They continue to be ridiculously pour, and begin taking other $2/hr jobs so they can find scraps of food to eat. So other people who are also only offering $2/hr continue their trend of paying absolute dirt. The process repeats. (Not to mention the people who are putting their foot down and saying, "No, I can't work for this money, I need to feed my family" get totally screwed, because there will always, ALWAYS be someone willing to work for less, but let me continue.) You get rich, and the poor become impoverished. Then they can't buy things (clothes, food, gas, toothpaste, what have you), and the retail market collapses. There are further implications, and plenty of variations, but I'll stop here. In the end, you have a life where things are absolute sh*t, and not only are things insufferable for most of the country, but you prove that you're not only a raging dickhead, but also a perpetrator of all this nonsense. Congratulations, sir, your selfishness destroys America. Consider reading up on basic economic structure and principles. Last edited by ANN_Bamboo on Fri Jan 18, 2008 9:18 pm; edited 1 time in total |
||||||
|
||||||
louieatrest
 Posts: 25 Location: montreal |
|
|||||
|
I am a little surprised with the how often I see the term "elitist". What makes one fanboy or fangirl feel like they are on a higher level anyway? I have to guess that liberally interchanging "comics" with "manga" threatens some peoples identity...but is that the same as elitism? Is it really a big deal amongst fans? Does it affect the price of coffee?
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
ric4001
Posts: 16 Location: The Red House Over Yonder |
|
|||||
|
Some act superior because they know about anime. I believe that's it! It's like being a child and knowing a secret whispered by a friend. Not all fans are like this by any means, though.
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Rawshark
Posts: 28 |
|
|||||
i agree with zac. manga are comics. my only problem is it gives oel artists ammunition to call their work just "manga". i like manga-influenced comics like joe mad's artwork or dramacon, but to call them just manga infers that they're japanese comics, which they are most definitely not. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
ric4001
Posts: 16 Location: The Red House Over Yonder |
|
|||||
|
I have to disagree with Rawshark. Sorry. I think that if an American author does a comic in manga form, then they should be allowed to call it manga if they wish. It's not exclusive to Japanese authors.
|
||||||
|
||||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group