|
Cars like that are what makes life worth living though. I mean, unless you're a starving kid from Chad, then what would make life worth living would be a scoop of dried corn you could boil in a discarded army helmet, but you know what I mean.
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2017 19:58
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 3, 2024 02:35 |
|
|
buckets of buckets posted:I hate the rich but I also hate moridins posting wat to do Over time I've come to terms with the idea that Moridin can manage to not post really badly if he's posting about class issues, which, you have to admit, is a fairly unique talent online.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2017 20:05
|
|
|
Pawn 17 posted:Im fairly sure that even if we destroyed the rich, redistributed their assets and then went full socialist, over time money of the many would fall into the hands of the few and a new super rich class would be formed. The new rich would then use their wealth to change the laws back to capitalism. Oh no 200 years of unprecedented general well being and happiness on Earth and we'd have to do something again afterward to have another 200 how bothersome just leave things as they are I rekken
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2017 20:19
|
|
|
Pawn 17 posted:Something like 50% of all rich people are preppers and have reserved spots in huge self-sustaining complexes/bunkers for just such an occasion. They also have vacation houses in other countries that are more rich people friendly. And yachts. And private security trained to murder thousands of poors on command. Hope you guys are up for a challenge! You just have to gain enough ground that you can tell the private security guys that they can reasonably expect to keep all they can carry out for the rest of their lives.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2017 00:52
|
|
|
The Management posted:Robots aren't labor, they're capital equipment. They're capital equipment and labor but that's not material. What's material is that ownership of capital is not allocated appropriately due to a legal system that values contracts over material contributions because that's legislatively convenient (rather than because it is fair as it is obviously not fair) along with secondary issues of an apparatus in place to enforce this unfair legal system.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2017 07:18
|
|
|
The amount of math you have to take to get an econ degree is hilariously small, especially given how complex many of the problems involving money are compared to items in the physical world that engineers or physicists deal with. Taking something an economist says about the economy to heart is usually like putting stock in your tarot reading aunt's opinions on nutrition. Economics is an arena for soft brained people to sit in hoping some salesman active in the economy comes by and picks them to be their fall guy or jester while they go about robbing people using some variation on the rounding off scheme from Superman 3.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2017 17:53
|
|
|
Pawn 17 posted:You don't have the slightest clue what you are talking about. Maybe you should read the article instead of just linking it because it's basically a list of times when people with actual quantitative abilities (in this article "physicists") came into econ blind and outshone the residents despite supposedly having to struggle with new material. And a guy with a physics BA has maybe half the range of quantitative skills of someone with a math BA, maybe a fourth the ability to get a computer to do work for him as a comp sci BA. Go look at the list of Nobel Laureates in Econ from the last 20 years or so and tell me what they got their undergrad degrees in. Here's a hint: not loving econ.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2017 20:08
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 3, 2024 02:35 |
|
|
SpaceClown posted:Where in the gently caress can you buy 4 cans of coke for one dollar, let alone 1200 calories worth of chips? A store
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2017 05:04
|
|