PDA

View Full Version : U.S. Issues "Job creator" wants to build new countries.


Frankie
08-16-2011, 01:56 PM
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/silicon-valley-billionaire-funding-creation-artificial-libertarian-islands-140840896.html


Silicon Valley billionaire funding creation of artificial libertarian islands


Pay Pal founder and early Facebook investor Peter Thiel has given $1.25 million to an initiative to create floating libertarian countries in international waters, according to a profile of the billionaire in Details magazine.

Thiel has been a big backer of the Seasteading Institute, which seeks to build sovereign nations on oil rig-like platforms to occupy waters beyond the reach of law-of-the-sea treaties. The idea is for these countries to start from scratch--free from the laws, regulations, and moral codes of any existing place. Details says the experiment would be "a kind of floating petri dish for implementing policies that libertarians, stymied by indifference at the voting booths, have been unable to advance: no welfare, looser building codes, no minimum wage, and few restrictions on weapons."

"There are quite a lot of people who think it's not possible," Thiel said at a Seasteading Institute Conference in 2009, according to Details. (His first donation was in 2008, for $500,000.) "That's a good thing. We don't need to really worry about those people very much, because since they don't think it's possible they won't take us very seriously. And they will not actually try to stop us until it's too late."

The Seasteading Institute's Patri Friedman says the group plans to launch an office park off the San Francisco coast next year, with the first full-time settlements following seven years later.

Thiel made news earlier this year for putting a portion of his $1.5 billion fortune into an initiative to encourage entrepreneurs to skip college.

Another Silicon Valley titan, Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, announced in June that he would be funding the "Clock of the Long Now." The clock is designed to keep ticking for 10,000 years, and will be built in a mountain in west Texas.

Jenson71
08-16-2011, 01:59 PM
That's awesome.

Jenson71
08-16-2011, 01:59 PM
Another Silicon Valley titan, Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, announced in June that he would be funding the "Clock of the Long Now." The clock is designed to keep ticking for 10,000 years, and will be built in a mountain in west Texas.

The fuck is this for?

Frankie
08-16-2011, 02:02 PM
That's awesome.

Isn't it?

Let's bring his taxes down even more so he can build more "sovereign nations."

Bob Dole
08-16-2011, 02:05 PM
Who is John Galt?

Discuss Thrower
08-16-2011, 02:06 PM
Sounds like some Bioshock shizz

NaptownChief
08-16-2011, 02:12 PM
Isn't it?

Let's bring his taxes down even more so he can build more "sovereign nations."


It wouldn't be good for the free loading 48% of this country if the self-responsible 52% found a way to free themselves of having to carry the unproductive dead weight. But it would be very cool idea for the productive folks.

Frankie
08-16-2011, 02:16 PM
It wouldn't be good for the free loading 48% of this country if the self-responsible 52% found a way to free themselves of having to carry the unproductive dead weight. But it would be very cool idea for the productive folks.

So anyone who is poor for any reason is "free loading." I got it.

SNR
08-16-2011, 02:17 PM
So anyone who is poor for any reason is "free loading." I got it.Yep. That's exactly what he said.

blaise
08-16-2011, 02:25 PM
Isn't it?

Let's bring his taxes down even more so he can build more "sovereign nations."

What are you saying, we should tax him more so he can't do this? I don't really get your point.

Seems crazy, though. Why wouldn't a bunch of pirates like the Somali pirates just take it over or demand ransom for not shooting missiles at it?

mlyonsd
08-16-2011, 02:29 PM
See Frankie these are examples of the cool kinds of things you get to do if you get off your ass and apply yourself.

Frankie
08-16-2011, 02:38 PM
What are you saying, we should tax him more so he can't do this? I don't really get your point.

Seems crazy, though. Why wouldn't a bunch of pirates like the Somali pirates just take it over or demand ransom for not shooting missiles at it?

I'm just saying despite the Right's efforts to erase the phrase "billionaires" from the public's mind and replace it with "job Creators" the are not going to spend their money on creating jobs. Rather, they take jobs away from the US for cheaper labor and spend their money on self-serving projects like having their own kingdoms. Their loyalties are to their pockets and not to the U.S. Just my opinion.

Look, I'm just bringing it up to your attention. I am not emotionally ready for a long heated argument (lost a very very special pet). Just take it as it is, and make your own judgement.

Frankie
08-16-2011, 02:39 PM
See Frankie these are examples of the cool kinds of things you get to do if you get off your ass and apply yourself.

:D

blaise
08-16-2011, 02:44 PM
I'm just saying despite the Right's efforts to erase the phrase "billionaires" from the public's mind and replace it with "job Creators" the are not going to spend their money on creating jobs. Rather, they take jobs away from the US for cheaper labor and spend their money on self-serving projects like having their own kingdoms. Their loyalties are to their pockets and not to the U.S. Just my opinion.

Look, I'm just bringing it up to your attention. I am not emotionally ready for a long heated argument (lost a very very special pet). Just take it as it is, and make your own judgement.

Yeah, I'm not looking to argue about it, but it's his money. If he wants to blow it on this, or move to France or bury it in his yard I don't care. I just don't see any reason to vilify him for this.
And as far as I know he'd hire US workers to build it.

Your cat would want him to be happy.

It does seem kind of futuristic and cool, in a way. Probably foolish, but whatever.

Saul Good
08-16-2011, 02:51 PM
I'm just saying despite the Right's efforts to erase the phrase "billionaires" from the public's mind and replace it with "job Creators" the are not going to spend their money on creating jobs. Rather, they take jobs away from the US for cheaper labor and spend their money on self-serving projects like having their own kingdoms. Their loyalties are to their pockets and not to the U.S. Just my opinion.

Look, I'm just bringing it up to your attention. I am not emotionally ready for a long heated argument (lost a very very special pet). Just take it as it is, and make your own judgement.

You're right as always. No jobs are going to be created by building an island nation from scratch. He'll probably do most of the work himself.

Frankie
08-16-2011, 02:53 PM
You're right as always. No jobs are going to be created by building an island nation from scratch. He'll probably do most of the work himself.

Do you honestly think he will use mostly American labor?

patteeu
08-16-2011, 02:56 PM
What are you saying, we should tax him more so he can't do this? I don't really get your point.

Seems crazy, though. Why wouldn't a bunch of pirates like the Somali pirates just take it over or demand ransom for not shooting missiles at it?

According to the BEP theory of international relations, you don't have anything to worry about if you don't start the fight by doing something like stationing troops on their land at the invitation of their government.

BucEyedPea
08-16-2011, 02:57 PM
I'm moving. I'll change them into paleo-conservative communities after I settle in.

Saul Good
08-16-2011, 03:04 PM
Do you honestly think he will use mostly American labor?

I have no idea, nor do I particularly care. Its his money. I'm sorry that you seem to think that he should spend it differently. Perhaps he should buy a couple of million dollar buses from France instead like the taxpayers just did for Obama.

This single purchase will create more jobs than you will in your life.

Bob Dole
08-16-2011, 03:22 PM
It wouldn't be good for the free loading 48% of this country if the self-responsible 52% found a way to free themselves of having to carry the unproductive dead weight. But it would be very cool idea for the productive folks.

Yet no love at all for the Atlas Shrugged reference... *sigh*

orange
08-16-2011, 03:48 PM
Oil-rig-like platforms on the high seas without building codes. Talk about a problem solving itself. :Robinson:

orange
08-16-2011, 03:58 PM
Perhaps he should buy a couple of million dollar buses from France instead like the taxpayers just did for Obama.


Those buses are probably more sea-worthy than his $1.25 million "island." Wake me when he changes that "million" to "billion," then I'll take it seriously.

p.s. Since when is "giving money to initiatives" entrepreneurial ... or Libertarian?

Saul Good
08-16-2011, 04:01 PM
Oil-rig-like platforms on the high seas without building codes. Talk about a problem solving itself. :Robinson:

Without building codes, nobody will have any incentive to make sure that their buildings are safe, right?

orange
08-16-2011, 04:04 PM
Without building codes, nobody will have any incentive to make sure that their buildings are safe, right?

All it takes is one contractor to take a shortcut. Of course in Randistan, all the contractors are noble and honest and would never do the things that they do everywhere else ever without the law hovering over them.

Frankie
08-16-2011, 04:05 PM
Oil-rig-like platforms on the high seas without building codes. Talk about a problem solving itself. :Robinson:

Yep. :D

Bump
08-17-2011, 01:08 AM
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/silicon-valley-billionaire-funding-creation-artificial-libertarian-islands-140840896.html


Silicon Valley billionaire funding creation of artificial libertarian islands




Another Silicon Valley titan, Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, announced in June that he would be funding the "Clock of the Long Now." The clock is designed to keep ticking for 10,000 years, and will be built in a mountain in west Texas.

I think billionaires get the scoop on that 2012 mayan prophecy and the polar shift and are preparing.

HonestChieffan
08-17-2011, 08:22 AM
gonna be a small Island.

Huffmeister
08-17-2011, 11:30 AM
Sounds like some Bioshock shizz

"I am Andrew Ryan, and I'm here to ask you a question. Is a man not entitled to the sweat of his brow?

'No!' says the man in Washington, 'It belongs to the poor.'
'No!' says the man in the Vatican, 'It belongs to God.'
'No!' says the man in Moscow, 'It belongs to everyone.'

I rejected those answers; instead, I chose something different. I chose the impossible. I chose... Rapture, a city where the artist would not fear the censor, where the scientist would not be bound by petty morality, Where the great would not be constrained by the small! And with the sweat of your brow, Rapture can become your city as well."

HonestChieffan
08-17-2011, 11:47 AM
1.25 Mil would get you about 300 acres of farmground. This looks a bit fishy.

FishingRod
08-17-2011, 11:48 AM
Yet no love at all for the Atlas Shrugged reference... *sigh*

Wasn’t he the guy that through witchcraft stopped all the Indians in the world

Discuss Thrower
08-17-2011, 02:54 PM
Upon further review, this reminds me of the story I tried to write in 3rd grade about a city at sea... Take or leave the political overtones, I'm in regardless.

VAChief
08-17-2011, 03:29 PM
Who is John Galt?

"I'll take Mythological Libertarian Geeks for 500 Alex."

Saul Good
08-17-2011, 05:08 PM
All it takes is one contractor to take a shortcut. Of course in Randistan, all the contractors are noble and honest and would never do the things that they do everywhere else ever without the law hovering over them.

So maybe you hire some independent person to inspect it instead of someone working for city hall...

BucEyedPea
08-17-2011, 05:13 PM
I'd rather they build a space-station city. Can't trust earth govts to never encroach!

Discuss Thrower
08-17-2011, 05:15 PM
I'd rather they build a space-station city. Can't trust earth govts to never encroach!

Whatever you say Ms Heinlein.

BucEyedPea
08-17-2011, 05:17 PM
Whatever you say Ms Heinlein.

That's a compliment! TYVM! :D

fan4ever
08-17-2011, 05:33 PM
Isn't it?

Let's bring his taxes down even more so he can build more "sovereign nations."

"We need to tax the rich more!!!

What? Now they want to leave? Oh, crap...never saw that coming..."

BucEyedPea
08-17-2011, 05:50 PM
"We need to tax the rich more!!!

What? Now they want to leave? Oh, crap...never saw that coming..."

The market is having the last say! :D

banyon
08-17-2011, 06:08 PM
This sounds like the beginning of sci-fi disaster dystopian novel.

They should name the island "Brave New World II" or something.

Would be nice though to have an example for the rest of the world that the pure libertarian magic pixie dust theories will go down in flames when put to the test.

VAChief
08-19-2011, 03:09 PM
"We need to tax the rich more!!!

What? Now they want to leave? Oh, crap...never saw that coming..."

Yes, I'm sure there will be a huge demand from the South Beach, Rodeo Drive crowd to go live on an oil rig.

PunkinDrublic
08-19-2011, 04:32 PM
Good I hope more of the Ayn Rand cultists do this.

KILLER_CLOWN
08-19-2011, 04:35 PM
"We need to tax the rich more!!!

What? Now they want to leave? Oh, crap...never saw that coming..."

Who are the rich that you speak of? Inflation should take care of those bastards!

TEX
08-19-2011, 04:38 PM
So anyone who is poor for any reason is "free loading." I got it.

No. Just those who can do something about it but choose not to so they can keep getting free shit while all of us have to pay for it...

NewChief
08-19-2011, 05:05 PM
I've got just the place!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Pacific_Garbage_Patch

Cannibal
08-19-2011, 05:41 PM
I've got just the place!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Pacific_Garbage_Patch

Well they'll need a place to dump their raw sewage and other waste so I guess that's as good a place as any.

|Zach|
08-19-2011, 05:54 PM
There have been a lot of variations of this idea. A lot of them seem to be based on a "floating city" model that is more of a ginormous ship.

I have never heard of anything tied to socio-political beliefs. That is interesting.

|Zach|
08-19-2011, 05:55 PM
This sounds like the beginning of sci-fi disaster dystopian novel.

They should name the island "Brave New World II" or something.

Would be nice though to have an example for the rest of the world that the pure libertarian magic pixie dust theories will go down in flames when put to the test.

All definite socio economic theories should get their own island. Putting it all to the test.

KCTitus
08-19-2011, 06:10 PM
All definite socio economic theories should get their own island. Putting it all to the test.

We know communism and socialism fail every time...maybe we could try something different on land for a change.

blaise
08-19-2011, 07:04 PM
All definite socio economic theories should get their own island. Putting it all to the test.

The first one to invest all their money in a military would take over.

KCTitus
08-19-2011, 07:24 PM
The first one to invest all their money in a military would take over.

Like China?

NaptownChief
08-19-2011, 07:40 PM
Yet no love at all for the Atlas Shrugged reference... *sigh*


Plenty of love...Found that quite funny. And I would expect nothing less from Bob Dole. With many there is a need to give them the public courtesy chuckle due to the rareness of it but with Bob Dole it is just assumed cause the fine work is just so common.

NaptownChief
08-19-2011, 07:42 PM
We know communism and socialism fail every time...maybe we could try something different on land for a change.


Very true but I would say that it would make for a very entertaining reality TV show...kinda like Survivor but only with different islands running different formats.

Watching the island of 100% socialist starve to death would be fun.

Jenson71
08-19-2011, 07:46 PM
There have been successful* socialist communes where nobody starves to death.



*Of course, success in this meaning isn't about a commercialized, industrialized, high-tech society.

NaptownChief
08-19-2011, 07:50 PM
There have been successful* socialist communes where nobody starves to death.



*Of course, success in this meaning isn't about a commercialized, industrialized, high-tech society.


Define successful....is not starving the benchmark?

Jenson71
08-19-2011, 07:58 PM
Define successful....is not starving the benchmark?

Successful would be like self-sufficient. Something like Amish, or monastery, or Jewish kibbutz life.

KCTitus
08-19-2011, 08:28 PM
There have been successful* socialist communes where nobody starves to death.

Success and Socialism are inherently at odds...no one succeeds, no one fails and eventually, when the 'rich peoples' money runs out, it becomes a communist system.

Jenson71
08-19-2011, 08:31 PM
Success and Socialism are inherently at odds...no one succeeds, no one fails and eventually, when the 'rich peoples' money runs out, it becomes a communist system.

It can work on really small scale systems, the kind I gave. As for large, country-wide economic systems, it's a complete and utter failure.

KCTitus
08-19-2011, 08:40 PM
It can work on really small scale systems, the kind I gave. As for large, country-wide economic systems, it's a complete and utter failure.

It failed in Jamestown, which was a pretty small scale system. Socialism only works for those that have imposed the system on others.

NaptownChief
08-19-2011, 08:49 PM
Socialism is a system that rewards the below average at the expense of the above average. So by default one has to ask, how do you ever set up a system in which the below average defeated the above average? Doesn't make logical sense.

It's like the worst team in the NFL winning the Super Bowl.

Jenson71
08-19-2011, 08:51 PM
It failed in Jamestown, which was a pretty small scale system. Socialism only works for those that have imposed the system on others.

It's worked in small, micro-economic systems, and Jamestown's failure doesn't prove differently. It fails in large.

Jenson71
08-19-2011, 08:54 PM
Socialism is a system that rewards the below average at the expense of the above average. So by default one has to ask, how do you ever set up a system in which the below average defeated the above average? Doesn't make logical sense.

It's like the worst team in the NFL winning the Super Bowl.

Historically, socialists countries haven't rewarded any large sector of the population (like the "below average"). It doesn't work because it disincentives wealth creation, and wealth creation, in a properly regulated system, often rewards everyone, even the "below average."

NaptownChief
08-19-2011, 08:55 PM
It fails in large.

And as such why would ANYBODY support such other than those wanting everyone to experience failure? I suppose those lazy asses that will fail regardless will enjoy the company I suppose.

KCTitus
08-19-2011, 08:55 PM
It's worked in small, micro-economic systems, and Jamestown's failure doesn't prove differently. It fails in large.

it fails...period. It's nothing more than a point on the political spectrum on the way to tyranny. Period.

NaptownChief
08-19-2011, 08:56 PM
Historically, socialists countries haven't rewarded any large sector of the population (like the "below average"). It doesn't work because it disincentives wealth creation, and wealth creation, in a properly regulated system, often rewards everyone, even the "below average."

Completely agree...So just to clarify, which side are you on?

Jenson71
08-19-2011, 08:57 PM
And as such why would ANYBODY support such other than those wanting everyone to experience failure? I suppose those lazy asses that will fail regardless will enjoy the company I suppose.

There's a reason socialism has pretty much died off since the end of the Soviet Union. Nobody does want to support it, after witnessing the enormous failures of it.

Jenson71
08-19-2011, 08:59 PM
it fails...period. It's nothing more than a point on the political spectrum on the way to tyranny. Period.

Except in some small-scaled, communal, voluntary associations, like - again - monasteries, Jewish kibbutz(es?), etc.

Jenson71
08-19-2011, 08:59 PM
Completely agree...So just to clarify, which side are you on?

The American side.

KCTitus
08-19-2011, 09:06 PM
Except in some small-scaled, communal, voluntary associations, like - again - monasteries, Jewish kibbutz(es?), etc.

never known communal systems to be voluntary...but ok, if you find people stupid enough I guess it's possible, until they realize their efforts are worthless.

Jenson71
08-19-2011, 09:09 PM
never known communal systems to be voluntary...but ok, if you find people stupid enough I guess it's possible, until they realize their efforts are worthless.

Aren't you aware of the numerous Catholic monasteries all across the world? They work in a communal, sharing setting.

I'm actually planning on doing some sort of week long retreat with a monastery next summer. Been planning on something like that for a long time.

There's nothing stupid or worthless about what they are doing, unless you have some sort of perverted view of what smart and worth is.

KCTitus
08-19-2011, 09:16 PM
Aren't you aware of the numerous Catholic monasteries all across the world? They work in a communal, sharing setting.

I'm actually planning on doing some sort of week long retreat with a monastery next summer. Been planning on something like that for a long time.

That's great...of course, we're talking apples and oranges here. Im talking about governmental systems and your talking about religious organizations. I think that it's inherently possible if the same individuals held them same philosophy that they could equally contribute to their common good.

Outside the religious environment, human beings are inherently evil, lazy and will cheat and lie when given the chance, which is why in a secular setting, communal living fails even for a very small group. The 'net' takers will eventually piss off those that actually work to the point the small 'micro society' you believe in eventually breaks down.

Good luck in your communal living with the monks...hopefully, you work for your keep and produce for your fellow humans.

Jenson71
08-19-2011, 09:32 PM
That's great...of course, we're talking apples and oranges here. Im talking about governmental systems and your talking about religious organizations. I think that it's inherently possible if the same individuals held them same philosophy that they could equally contribute to their common good.

Outside the religious environment, human beings are inherently evil, lazy and will cheat and lie when given the chance, which is why in a secular setting, communal living fails even for a very small group. The 'net' takers will eventually piss off those that actually work to the point the small 'micro society' you believe in eventually breaks down.

I disagree that human beings are best described as inherently evil, lazy, cheating liars. Many human beings are industrious, goal-oriented, and exploring. And a large economic system that constrains those qualities will ultimately not live long.

Socialism doesn't not work because men are evil and selfish. It doesn't work because human beings, in general, want improvement and creation. And that is very often a beautiful thing.

KCTitus
08-19-2011, 09:48 PM
I disagree that human beings are best described as inherently evil, lazy, cheating liars. Many human beings are industrious, goal-oriented, and exploring. And a large economic system that constrains those qualities will ultimately not live long.

Socialism doesn't not work because men are evil and selfish. It doesn't work because human beings, in general, want improvement and creation. And that is very often a beautiful thing.

odd how these topics weave...

Humans are self interested. We can call it selfish for our purpose. As such a person works for himself and his family -- or if you prefer his fellow monks. He does not work for those that do not work for themselves. The human spirit does, however, have a sense of compassion for those that are unable to work for themselves, but they quickly recognize when this is a ruse.

Any system that rewards sloth or promotes lack of work, will fail. Socialism is that system in a secular setting. Humans do want improvement but they work for themselves and their family -- they do not in a socialist/communist system.

Frankie
08-19-2011, 10:21 PM
No. Just those who can do something about it but choose not to so they can keep getting free shit while all of us have to pay for it...

There is always some abuse of system. But I would say the Super-rich, err, "Job creators" are more unified in their abuse, and their abuse cost us a lot more.

If there's abuse, I'd rather it would be by a guy who needs it than the guy who never has.

Frankie
08-19-2011, 10:25 PM
We know communism and socialism fail every time...maybe we could try something different on land for a change.

Socialism to Communism = Capitalism to today's version of Capitalism.

Both are destructive in their extreme forms.

Frankie
08-19-2011, 10:27 PM
It failed in Jamestown, which was a pretty small scale system.

:facepalm:

NaptownChief
08-19-2011, 10:53 PM
their abuse cost us a lot more.
.

I would be very interested in the facts behind said statement.

NaptownChief
08-19-2011, 11:00 PM
The one thing that has been proven by history is that 99.9% of all people vote for and support systems that are in their best interest. Socialism is in the best interest of below average people so they can be carried by above average folks. So the belief and support of such system lets us all know what type a person you are without having to even ask. Speaks volumes for our POTUS as well. Granted we now have 3 years of failure at monumental levels to be well versed in his abilities.

Frankie
08-19-2011, 11:48 PM
I would be very interested in the facts behind said statement.

Opinion. Based on logic. One of those 2+2=4 things. Not everything has to be backed up here by time consuming internet research. This is NOT a courtroom, and you and I are not a lawyers.

Frankie
08-19-2011, 11:51 PM
The one thing that has been proven by history is that 99.9% of all people vote for and support systems that are in their best interest. Socialism is in the best interest of below average people so they can be carried by above average folks. So the belief and support of such system lets us all know what type a person you are without having to even ask. Speaks volumes for our POTUS as well. Granted we now have 3 years of failure at monumental levels to be well versed in his abilities.:spock:

I think your use of phrases like "below average" and "above average" is at best irresponsible.

NaptownChief
08-20-2011, 08:25 AM
:spock:

I think your use of phrases like "below average" and "above average" is at best irresponsible.


I realize that in this modern day pussification of people and children they hate words like "below average" and hate keeping score in kids sporting competitions because they don't want anyone to have to "lose". That said as much as they want to pretend otherwise the reality is 1/2 of all people and children are below average. That is how averages work by definition. Sorry Frankie, liberal political correctness can't change mathmatic principles the way they like to alter the history books.

banyon
08-20-2011, 09:16 AM
It failed in Jamestown, which was a pretty small scale system. Socialism only works for those that have imposed the system on others.

Uh, Jamestown was not a commune.

Jamestown didn't really fail, in fact it is still the oldest English permanent settlement in the United States. It was the strongest outpost which helped form the Virginia colony.

Roanoke failed, and perhaps that's what you were thinking of? But it wasn't a commune either, it was a colonial outpost and depended heavily on imports from England. That is not how communes work. Also, no one knows why Roanoke failed, since no one was left to tell us about it. It is still a mystery.

Small "c" communism has worked everywhere. I don't know where you got your idea that kibutzes and small communes fail. Maybe you're just conflating it with large "c" Communism, which has mostly failed everywhere (except China) to date?

Frankie
08-20-2011, 01:40 PM
I realize that in this modern day pussification of people and children they hate words like "below average" and hate keeping score in kids sporting competitions because they don't want anyone to have to "lose". That said as much as they want to pretend otherwise the reality is 1/2 of all people and children are below average. That is how averages work by definition. Sorry Frankie, liberal political correctness can't change mathmatic principles the way they like to alter the history books.

You misunderstood my point. Your post sounded like you were painting everyone who was not rich as below average. Whether you were doing that intentionally or not it came across that way. That's what I called irresponsible.

There are millions of people who are poor or living paycheck to paycheck who have not been lazy, unintelligent, or abusers of the system. A lot of people are super rich because of ONE good idea or another form of pure luck. THEY, are not above average.

mnchiefsguy
08-20-2011, 01:43 PM
Opinion. Based on logic. One of those 2+2=4 things. Not everything has to be backed up here by time consuming internet research. This is NOT a courtroom, and you and I are not a lawyers.

So, as usual, you have no facts to back up your statement.

stevieray
08-20-2011, 01:51 PM
A lot of people are super rich because of ONE good idea or another form of pure luck. THEY, are not above average.


....your envy/obssession of people with money is pathetic.

Frankie
08-20-2011, 01:53 PM
....your envy/obssession of people with money is pathetic.

Thanks, Dr. Phil.

Frankie
08-20-2011, 01:54 PM
So, as usual, you have no facts to back up your statement.

No. I'm just living it up to you to do the research to prove me wrong. I've got better things to do.

stevieray
08-20-2011, 01:57 PM
Thanks, Dr. Phil.
doesn't take a shrink to figure that out, dude.

mnchiefsguy
08-20-2011, 01:58 PM
No. I'm just living it up to you to do the research to prove me wrong. I've got better things to do.

When you make an assertion with no facts, then you look like a fool.....

You keep on living it up though...

Frankie
08-20-2011, 01:58 PM
....your envy/obssession of people with money is pathetic.

One man's "envy/obssession" is another man's "humanity."

You should try that some time.

Frankie
08-20-2011, 02:00 PM
When you make an assertion with no facts, then you look like a fool.....

You keep on living it up though...

Take the seat next to me then. You are asserting I'm wrong.

mnchiefsguy
08-20-2011, 02:00 PM
You misunderstood my point. Your post sounded like you were painting everyone who was not rich as below average. Whether you were doing that intentionally or not it came across that way. That's what I called irresponsible.

There are millions of people who are poor or living paycheck to paycheck who have not been lazy, unintelligent, or abusers of the system. A lot of people are super rich because of ONE good idea or another form of pure luck. THEY, are not above average.

So how many good ideas does it take to be above average? Two? Three? If someone gets rich off of one idea, well then it was probably a pretty damn good idea, and that alone puts them solidly in the above average category.

And you calling anyone irresponsible is laughable, given the tripe you spew.

stevieray
08-20-2011, 02:01 PM
One man's "envy/obssession" is another man's "humanity."

You should try that some time.

:rolleyes:

ya, looking at successful people, then assuming they only had ONE idea or their success was just pure luck is the epitome of displaying humanity.

you should grow up some time.

Frankie
08-20-2011, 02:01 PM
doesn't take a shrink to figure that out, dude.

No. It takes a mythology book. Like always.

stevieray
08-20-2011, 02:04 PM
No. It takes a mythology book. Like always.

awwwww, reduced to religious bigotry in two posts. again.

Frankie
08-20-2011, 02:11 PM
awwwww, reduced to religious bigotry in two posts. again.

Whatever. But "humanity" is not found in the pages of any book. It's found in one's heart.

stevieray
08-20-2011, 02:40 PM
Whatever.

no, truth.

nstygma
08-20-2011, 02:49 PM
A lot of people are super rich because of ONE good idea or another form of pure luck. THEY, are not above average.wow, what a statement! i can't think of anyone who fits that description.

VAChief
08-20-2011, 06:43 PM
wow, what a statement! i can't think of anyone who fits that description.

Paulie Shore, Rush Limbaugh, Keith Olbermann, Paris Hilton, just off the top of my head list of absolutely non producers who rake it in based on nothing but being in the right place/right time or who they know.

nstygma
08-20-2011, 11:21 PM
Paulie Shore, Rush Limbaugh, Keith Olbermann, Paris Hilton, just off the top of my head list of absolutely non producers who rake it in based on nothing but being in the right place/right time or who they know.whatever they are doing, they are above average at doing it.
paris hilton wouldn't be where she is without being born into wealth. she also wouldn't be where she is if she didn't work hard after her colossal debacle and loss of inheritance. i don't see pure luck in any of this. it still took lots of work.

Frankie
08-21-2011, 12:48 PM
whatever they are doing, they are above average at doing it.
paris hilton wouldn't be where she is without being born into wealth. she also wouldn't be where she is if she didn't work hard after her colossal debacle and loss of inheritance. i don't see pure luck in any of this. it still took lots of work.

She did it because she is still making money for the star-makers. Don't kid yourself.

nstygma
08-21-2011, 01:01 PM
She did it because she is still making money for the star-makers. Don't kid yourself.i think kim kardashian would be a better example of pure luck.

Frankie
08-21-2011, 01:04 PM
i think kim kardashian would be a better example of pure luck.

Same product. Different asses. 'tsall.