|
So you actually made this thread because you're too much of a coward to engage hard questions that you dodged for upwards of nine months, right?
|
#
¿
Oct 9, 2015 14:40
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 06:38 |
|
|
jrodefeld posted:gently caress you and get the gently caress off of my thread. I don't have any goddamn patience for your loving poo poo anymore. You're in no position to call anyone a coward, you selfish manchild. Every time someone brings a substantive argument to you you do the following: • Spew a giant wall of text, some of which may be straight up copy-pasted • Insist you don't want to talk about the subject anymore (while posting about it) • Refuse to address the issue at all, even when pressed on it Every single loving time. I'm literally watching you do it right now. Remember how you're talking about vaccines? jrodefeld posted:I'm not talking about vaccines other than to say that I stand by my view that I oppose the State forcing people to take them against their will. I never said vaccines are "bad", or that people shouldn't take them. I stated something that is true, namely that there is a real danger to granting pharmaceutical companies carte blanche to produce vaccines that the State then MANDATES the public to take. The incentive structure is such that it encourages an overproduction of vaccines and pressure to give more and more vaccines at younger and younger ages, beyond the reasonable demands of public safety. Where's your skepticism of big money and distrust of corporate greed when it comes to vaccine production, Progressives? Hey look, you don't want to talk about vaccines, you're bringing it up again, insisting that "the government shouldn't be allowed to make people get vaccinated, even though I think they are good", presumably because you have literally no comprehension of vaccines. Which is why the last time you posted about vaccines, you got loving [url="https://"http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3636681&userid=0&perpage=40&pagenumber=192#post441414775"]turbo[/url] destroyed. Of course, you aren't going to admit to actually believing any of the things you said, you're just going to insist that it was a miscommunication and you don't actually think, or ever thought, that vaccines may be linked to autism. This ties into a trend of you, noted coward jrodefeld, being completely incapable of taking responsibility for your own actions, or living up to anything you did. Notice how you kept saying in that thread that you didn't wan to talk about it, that you wanted to change the subject, but every single time you had to get the last word? Because god forbid someone call you out on your lovely views. The easiest solution for you, jrodefeld, is to just clamp your hands over your ears, go "LALALALALA" and pretend it didn't happen. I don't know how in your childhood you never learned to take accountability for anything, but I'm going to assume it's something you picked up from your mother that you keep talking about, and I'm going to hope that her business skills are better than her parenting skills. Remember when Muscle Tracer called you out on not answering that question about healthcare and elasticity? Here, let me post it again for you, just in case at some point you forgot. Muscle Tracer posted:You do not understand "inelasticity." Let me give you a two-part example: Do you know how long it took you to answer (while responding to way less substantive posts)? Three loving months, you coward. Three loving months to crawl through mises.org, hoping that you'll find a link on there, because god knows we've found you pulling pretty much every single source you've ever used from there. I'm not sure you've ever posted an original thought here; your method seems to be basically infodumping Mises on it with an attempted leftist spin, then backpedaling furiously as people call you out left and right for the consequences of your libertarian beliefs/who you look up to (e.g. Hoppe being a racist piece of poo poo, Rothbard literally advocating for child labor, etc.) until you go "hey guys, do-over" and try the same thing again. I'm convinced that you don't actually understand the words you write. You're like a sovereign citizen who knows that the arcane rituals to paralyze judges must be somewhere in the ::j of the family rodefeld:: and joinder and maritime law or something, but every time you're convinced you just must be messing up the magic words that will make us suddenly understand the great path of Libertopia. You assert things as fact and fundamental truth that aren't (and then refuse to acknowledge that you are incorrect when you are called out on this). You refuse to acknowledge any negative consequences of your decisions (I'm not a racist, even though it's really clear that I'm supporting ideologies that would be terrible for not-white people!) You refuse to engage with anything that might have an answer you can't immediately pull from mises.org. And then you get mad because someone is calling you out. jrodefeld posted:You might be able to anticipate my response, but the problem you faced has everything to do with the fact that the police are a part of the State. They have absolutely NO incentive to retrieve your stolen stuff. If, on the other hand you could hire competing security forces to secure your neighborhood and catch and punish thieves then you would be far more likely to see much better protection of your property rights. After all, a private business that depends on your voluntary payments rather than coercive taxation has every incentive to provide you with a good service. If they don't, you can fire them and hire a different security company. Like this. "Lalalalala, economic coercion doesn't exist, lalalalala!" Like, we've gone over this before. You just sort of magically wishfully think that the free market will solve everything, and refuse to acknowledge any indications that it won't (even when given evidence). But hey, jrodefeld. Maybe you can have your grandparents come make some posts for you to save you from looking like even more of a coward, the same way they swooped in to take care of your medical bills. Good job bootstrapping yourself there, chief.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2015 12:08
|
|
|
jrodefeld posted:Oh I see. Ever getting help from anyone somehow makes me a hypocritical libertarian? For the record, I only ever borrowed $1000 from my grandparents which I promptly paid back, but way to bring up a red herring. I think it's hilarious, honestly, because in your ideal libertopia societ,y had you not been lucky enough to be born to grandparents with more money than sense, you'd be dead. jrodefeld posted:Let's get this straight though. I am not obligated to answer every single post on YOUR schedule. I've wasted far more time than I should on these forums. It's like you are unaware that unlike apparently some of you, I actually have a day job, family obligations and other hobbies. If I don't post here every loving week or every month, it doesn't make me a "coward" who had to concede defeat. Oh hey, look, jrodefeld. You're refusing to take accountability for your actions. Again. Which one of us posted the big confrontational thread after having to be contained to his own thread because he'd constantly make lovely threads, run away, and then make another lovely thread? It's not me! And frankly, the fact that you're responding to this instead of any of the substantial posts that actually might require you to know anything about anything, ever is exactly why you're a coward. You respond to the easy poo poo. You respond to things like this, like little one-off posts, but you do not engage with substance unless you have to. You ask for the debate, and then when it comes down to it you put off answering hard questions as long as possible. Your quantity is not what makes you a coward, jrodefeld. Your avoidance of content-filled posts in favor of bullshit like this makes you a coward. jrodefeld posted:I don't care what the gently caress you do. Just don't aim those loving guns in my direction. You don't really care about the State violence committed on your behalf. If there is a social problem you are concerned about, go fix it! Work in the market, create something, innovate. Don't use the political process to terrorize your fellow man into complying with your social designs. I dunno, my interactions with the government seem pretty voluntary. Have you considered moving? (You wouldn't consider it, because you are a coward who cannot bear the idea of being even slightly inconvenienced.) jrodefeld posted:For a principled person, there is a threshold that must be met if the State is to seize property. The property must be proven to be invalid for some clearly defined reason. It shouldn't be a vague justification or a democratic whim of the majority. Are you telling me that taxation has no clearly defined reason? Which member of your family taught you that, or which Mises article?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2015 13:55
|
|
|
Hey jrodefeld, was it your mother who raised you to be a cowardly little baby who runs from anything he can't address and/or refuse to acknowledge that it exists? Is she the one we should blame for your refusal to own up to your actions, or should that blame also be passed to your grandparents for lending you a hand by paying for "medical bills" (which might have been completely unnecessary, see: your dentist bills) when the free market proved that you were too incompetent to manage your own finances?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2016 02:33
|
|
|
Do you think your grandparents ever feel shame that they're responsible for two generations of selfish, cowardly, lazy Rodefelds?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2016 17:11
|
|
|
jrodefeld posted:The idea that I am even bothering to defend multiple year old posts about a long resolved criminal trial is absurd. But what if I was concerned about an ISIS attack on Los Angeles? Would I be unreasonable in being extra cautious about Middle Eastern men who were also Muslims? Would that make me a bigot, even though the clear evidence shows that nearly all ISIS members are Muslims who are of Middle Eastern descent? Yes, it would, just like your lovely mother.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2016 12:12
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Serious question jrod: once we dismantle the federal government, what would stop the KKK from becoming the law in large parts of the country just as it was before the FBI infiltrated and largely destroyed it? No rational person would ever do that, and furthermore-- [whines to grandparents until they pay for him to have his dental fillings removed]
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2016 14:13
|
|
|
jrodefeld have you literally ever done anything that's not you blindly, incompetently piggybacking off another person's work in your life? (no, you haven't)
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2016 17:34
|
|
|
You are not going to reply to this because it includes substantative responses along with making fun of you for being an ignorant bitch baby, jrodefeld, but it feels good to take some aggression out on lovely sociopaths.jrodefeld posted:We're only "silent" because you haven't read the literature to have a fuller picture of the libertarian position on workers rights and other economic matters. I have read enough to know that you don't give a single gently caress about worker's rights because you've never had to deal with that, you incompetent manchild. jrodefeld posted:It's humorous how you throw in the word "ethnic" when mentioning "time preference" as if the entire concept of a time preference in economics was dreamed up as a way to discriminate against minorities. You know what's humorous? How you claim poo poo like: jrodefeld posted:You, frankly, don't have a clue what you are talking about. I want to caution people that somehow think that I am somehow obsessing about race, that you all do fine obsessing about race without me. The reason I react so strongly to this character assassination attack against me, is that I personally focus a great deal on the systemic racism and discrimination that the State and private citizens inflict upon minority communities in the United States. This is a passion of mine. I love black culture, black music, black comedy and so forth. And I'm not just saying that. Since middle school, I've idolized black role models and I've identified with civil rights causes as long as I was ever politically aware. But weirdly, in that very same post: jrodefeld posted:But what if I was concerned about an ISIS attack on Los Angeles? Would I be unreasonable in being extra cautious about Middle Eastern men who were also Muslims? Would that make me a bigot, even though the clear evidence shows that nearly all ISIS members are Muslims who are of Middle Eastern descent? And in your history: jrodefeld posted:what about Trayvon? We know he had a history of getting into fights, he was suspended multiple times and was a drug user, and not just marijuana. He was a regular user of "Lean" or "Purple Drank" which, as anyone familiar with southern rap music could tell you, is a drug that contains codein, a soda of some sort and candy. In fact the skittles and sody that Trayvon bought that night were intended to make some Lean You know, also citing a whole bunch of incredibly racist people as huge influences on you... and then backpedaling anytime you get called out on being a racist piece of poo poo. You're a racist piece of poo poo, jrodefeld. You're just either in denial, or you are too loving stupid to be able to understand that the movement you support lies in bed with white supremacists for a reason. You goddamn watermelon-loving shitlord. jrodefeld posted:What do you mean by "economic coercion"? Let's not play loose with words and definitions now. "Coercion" actually has a definition. Suppose I go up to you and say "hey, I've got a job offer for you. It pays $6 an hour. Will you accept it?" Well jrodefeld, people don't suggest that someone offering me, someone who is making more than $6/hr, is coercion, you dishonest little weasel. However, if I did not have a job, and my choices were between the following: • 6 dollars an hour, which is well below the value I bring to a company • Starving and dying Guess what? I'm gonna take the job, even if I know it's a lovely one that I will hate and will be bad for my long-term health, because being dead is significantly worse for my long term health on account of being loving dead, you goddamn idiot. Would I normally take that job? No. But that's what loving economic coercion is, and I know for a fact that you've been told about this before, and once again you've opted to magically forget about it because you can't retain any information that you didn't read straight off mises.org. jrodefeld posted:Unless, there are some side benefits to taking on the job that would compensate you for accepting a lower wage. Or maybe you'd take it on as a second job to get another mark on your resume and connect with more people and learn different skills. It is posts like this that make me absolutely loving certain, jrodefeld, that you have never actually worked a minimum wage job in your loving life, and you've probably spent most of it mooching off your shitheaded libertarian mom and your too-kind grandparents.  NOBODY GIVES A gently caress ABOUT JOB SKILLS YOU GOT AT A MINIMUM WAGE JOBGuess what? Subway does not care that I am the best loving sandwich artist ever; I'm still going to get paid like the average sandwich artist. If I want to get another job using my sandwich artistry... well, my choices are other food places that are also paying minimum wage! I can't go from sandwich artistry to office filing! That actually looks worse on my resume! Not that you would know that, because you've never done anything that isn't working for your mother. jrodefeld posted:Or perhaps you could be offered a low wage in place of what otherwise would be an unpaid internship? In such a case, the main reason for taking the job is that you'd learn very valuable skills that will in the near future help you to apply for a job which pays many times that much? I think unpaid internships are also lovely and should be done away with. jrodefeld posted:There are jobs that are not hiring at present. Abolishing the minimum wage would allow you to make a lowball offer to a potential employer. You could say "I know you are not hiring at present, but I want a chance to prove my worth for a six week stint. I just ask $5 an hour compensation and after the six weeks is up, if I have proven my value, I'd like to apply as a full time worker making the market wage for this type of work." What is to prevent an employer from just shuffling through people every six weeks if all they need is vaguely competent bodies, like most minimum wage jobs? There are far more people who fulfill the criteria of "vaguely competent" and "need a job" than there are positions. jrodefeld posted:You are not permitted to do this under today's law. How could these voluntary choices ever be considered "coercion"? This would require a perversion of language. Coercion is almost a synonym for "aggression" and voluntary economic contracts cannot, by definition, be aggression. I literally just explained how this is coercion. Coercion is, by definition, using force to convince someone to do something they wouldn't normally do. Just because "the threat of starvation" is not direct force does not mean it's not force. You loving moron. jrodefeld posted:There are many libertarian authors who have written extensively about how, in a genuine free society, there will be many more economic opportunities available for people and it will be MUCH more feasible to start a business for yourself or with a number of colleagues. Without occupational licensure requirements and other regulations, opening a business and selling your services on the market becomes a much more viable option. And this would not result in a decrease of safety, just like the Gilded Age, how? jrodefeld posted:And even if you don't go into business for yourself, the very fact that so many more OTHER people will be able to, will create millions more jobs who will all be competing for good laborers and so your choices as a wage earner will expand substantially. jrodefeld_mercury_filling_powered_fanfiction.txt jrodefeld posted:The idea you are proposing that millions of lower-class people will be somehow "coerced" into take very low wage employment because they literally have no other options is really a fallacious scenario that is unlikely, or far less likely than in any State-run alternative, to exist in a truly free society. jrodefeld_mercury_filling_powered_fanfiction.txt THIS LITERALLY HAPPENED, ALREADY, IN REAL LIFE, YOU INCOMPETENT loving MANCHILD. jrodefeld posted:And if you want to talk about a "poverty trap" there is none more fiendish than the Welfare State which has trapped people into a cycle of poverty and dependency. Politicians brag about the number of people on the doll and never about the number of people they help gain their independence and the ability to sustain a middle class living without outside assistance. jrodefeld you're literally making poo poo up you dishonest fuckface. Did you forget when Caros brutally loving smacked you down about mutual aid societies and how the reason welfare exists is because people didn't have money in your "free society"? Is your lovely mother proud of having raised a dishonest, lying idiot who claims that all his hard work is the reason he's ahead in life, who mooches off of other people's work to sell loving pirated blu-rays? Do you think your grandparents ever regret giving you money instead of forcing you to live with the consequences of your actions for once in your lovely selfish life?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2016 13:03
|
|
|
jrodefeld posted:I've explained this to you many times over the course of this thread, but I'll try once again. a] Nolanar posted:Let's play the syllogism game! b] You're a manchild who refuses to ever admit fault or deficit in anything and your grandparents should be loving ashamed of themselves for enabling your cowardice.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2016 04:41
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 06:38 |
|
|
jrodefeld posted:Read your own posts aloud and you'll see why I generally ignore them. But I'll make an exception because you touched on something I'd wanted to talk about anyway. Given your past history of lying and changing your story and feelings to match the views of the website you're on, I'm pretty sure you're lying about this, because "making up poo poo about your work history to support your insane, sociopathic views" seems entirely in character for you. But I'm going to even assume that this is true (though it's probably not, because you're a dishonest shitweasel)... jrodefeld posted:But it is flatly untrue that there isn't a path upward in even retail companies. Every manager I ever talked to during those years started as a regular employee and worked their way up until they were making $30 an hour or whatever they made as manager. Now, nobody is claiming that managing a Taco Bell is the height of accomplishment, but management skills certainly translate to other occupations. Holy poo poo you really have no idea what you're talking about. $30/hour as a manager at Taco Bell/etc? THAT IS NOT A THING THAT ACTUALLY EXISTS All I just did was google "manager mcdonalds wages". Google posted:Fast Food Manager $8.34 - $12.02 Hey, look, it's anything that happened in economic history, ever: the greatest enemy of jrodefeld. jrodefeld posted:To claim that these starter jobs are worthless because there is no upward mobility and other, higher paying employers don't care one bit about your early work history is flatly false. Your basis for this is... I'm going to guess [extended fart noise]? jrodefeld posted:I got my first real, legitimate good job when I was 21 and still in college. Flipping burgers at McDonald's didn't translate "directly" skills-wise to what I was asked to do, but my references I believe proved the difference. The job was a computer engineer position, where I had to work with AutoCAD, do surveying and plot construction for a company that built buildings and managed construction in the town I lived in for a while. A bit of everything. The job paid $23 an hour, which is not bad for a 21 year old kid. I could pick my own hours, do the work on my own time. If I wanted to work 20 hours one week I could. If I wanted to work 40 the next and any time in between I could. No bosses looking over my shoulder, I got to chill in an air conditioned room listening to music and working on a computer, or take a company car around taking pictures and listening to music while I surveyed construction sites or took pictures. "I got paid to do very little actual work. I feel like my references were the difference despite the fact that I have no evidence for this, and there is probably vital information I'm leaving out because I am a proven dishonest liar." Yep. [extended fart noise] jrodefeld posted:It was a pretty sweet job at that time in my life and I was sad to have to let it go when I moved after a year or so. But I don't think for a minute that I would have gotten that job without the stellar references I had accumulated during my teenage years. You think this because you are a self-centered, narcissistic, egotistical manchild who probably huffs his own farts because he thinks they smell like roses. jrodefeld posted:There are all kinds of reasons why an employer will choose one applicant over another. All other things being equal, the person who at twenty one already has a work history of over half a dozen jobs and stellar recommendations has a substantial advantage over another person who is applying for his or her first job. Believe me, any idiot could have quickly gotten the skills necessary to do that $23 an hour job. You don't need a college degree or substantial technical training in order to get any decent paying job. I learned a lot of it on the job because they were willing to take a chance that I could do so. "I literally don't have any empathy for other human beings because I am incapable of understanding the advantages I grew up with. Everyone can ask their grandparents to pay for frivolous medical expenses to get fillings removed, right?" jrodefeld posted:But I can guarantee one thing. If the minimum wage was $15 an hour when I was a teenager, I wouldn't have gotten any of those jobs. I wouldn't have had any money saved up by the time I was in my twenties, and I probably wouldn't have gotten that good job at 21. [citation needed]
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2016 05:51
|
|