BF2S Forums Official Mass Shooting & Suicide Bomber thread

Jay wrote:

Pochsy wrote:

Jay wrote:

Why would I want to watch a completely irrelevant TED video? Is TED where you get all your views from? Explains a lot.

Maybe because some said it simply enough for you to understand, with all the proper slides pre-made. Too good for youtube now? Shit guys, Jay really is elite.

I know I can't argue against it, so just ignore it. Excellent strategy.

So what's the introduction to psychology book say on that? Does that make you an introvert or an extrovert?

What did 'the rich don't create jobs' have to do with what I posted?

Hint: nothing.

Hint: this.

Jay wrote:

[And to explain why wealth transfer systems are bad in this case, it's because they jack up prices across the board. When more people have money, prices will rise. When prices rise, people will demand higher transfers to offset it, and it becomes an upward spiral. If the transfers stopped, and people got by with what wages they could get, there would be an initial heavy shock, but prices would drop to compensate for the new lower wage shelf. In the end, the country would end up being competitive in the export market, but have lowered access to imports. Because so many people are dependent on government jobs, or government handouts in southern European nations (and France), cost of living is astronomical compared to where it should be because they've been able to vote themselves largesse out of the treasury for so long, thus making themselves uncompetitive.]

..So you didn't watch the video. You're putting more effort into not watching it than just potentially wasting 5 min. It's kind of sad.

Here's the crux: transferring wealth does make people more wealthy, because then they have money to spend in the economy, and that boosts sales. All the international competition in the world isn't going to help anybody but the wealthy if nobody ever sees that money and it ends up doing nothing.

Jay wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Jay wrote:

Just about every economy in Europe is on the verge of collapse right now because of the Euro.

The Euro is not the problem.

"Every state in America is on the verge of collapse because of the dollar"
See how that doesn't work?

You're right, it's not the Euro's problem. It's the fact that the governments that adopted it did not take into account and plan for what it meant to have a single unified currency. They carried on as they always had, even though the reset button of devaluation had been taken away from them. You can't live the good life with sky-high socialism induced cost of living issues when you're sharing a currency with a massive exporter such as Germany. It just doesn't work. I just don't see the system working out long term unless the countries included under the currencies' umbrella make radical changes and step away from the wealth transfer systems that are acting as an anchor on their competitiveness.

[And to explain why wealth transfer systems are bad in this case, it's because they jack up prices across the board. When more people have money, prices will rise. When prices rise, people will demand higher transfers to offset it, and it becomes an upward spiral. If the transfers stopped, and people got by with what wages they could get, there would be an initial heavy shock, but prices would drop to compensate for the new lower wage shelf. In the end, the country would end up being competitive in the export market, but have lowered access to imports. Because so many people are dependent on government jobs, or government handouts in southern European nations (and France), cost of living is astronomical compared to where it should be because they've been able to vote themselves largesse out of the treasury for so long, thus making themselves uncompetitive.]

Only in part.

German banks were stupid enough to loan money to already corrupt and bankrupt economies, as were British and Icelandic banks - both countries being outside the Euro. This would likely have happened if the Euro hadn't existed.

That they haven't been allowed to go bankrupt, and German, British and Icelandic banks are being repaid through central taxation is a good or bad thing depending on how you look at it.

A common currency wasn't a bad idea for the purpose of trade, letting every country borrow at the same low rate was what was stupid.

Pochsy wrote:

Alright, so that's inflation. So what does money actually do? It represents work value, right? If we let money make money and it "underwrite loans" all day, doesn't that just centralize the money even further for the already wealthy? How can the wealthy ever spend the money accrued? Who does it help to have all the money in a few accounts that never gets spent...but instead just makes more money? You seem to have forgotten the purpose of money in your pursuit of it, I feel.

EDIT- oh, and the answer isn't wages. Because they want to automatize things and not have to pay people. It's in the video: I'm not an original person. I just only had 5 min to spare, not 25.

The money sitting in the bank and investment accounts of the ultra wealthy is a sort of heat sink for the economy. They're not spending that money on necessities or even luxuries after a certain point. You can only own so many homes, right? Past a certain point the money they possess is just way beyond the amount anyone can spend in a lifetime. Ok, so what?

If you take money from them, they'll barely feel it. Oh, they'll be pissed, and put pressure on Congress or whoever else to remedy the situation, but in reality the super wealthy won't feel much pain. So you've taken their money, and now what are you going to do with it? Robin Hood, right? Steal from the rich, and give to the poor. Well, as I suggested in my previous post, that leads to inflation. Why?

Here's the secret you're failing to grasp: wealth is not how many gold coins are sitting in your pile, it's your relative stack of coins compared to your neighbors. It really is all about 'keeping up with the Joneses'. In the original example, the person making $2/hr was doubly wealthy compared to the person making $1/hr. Assuming prices were aligned so that the person making $1/hr had the bare necessities to survive, the person making $2/hr could spend half his/her income on the necessities and then start moving onto luxuries, or not juggling between missed payments on utilities. If everyone makes the same wage, they're all equally poor, again because price controls don't exist. This is the fatal flaw in communism: you can't have communism without effective price controls, and you can't have effective price controls without installing a massive police state to prevent a black market from forming and the hoarding of goods. Even then, people will still find ways to smuggle and hoard and sell from shortage.

Society has to have a natural gradient for the system to work correctly. There have to be the ultra poor, but not necessarily the stratospheric rich if you control the money supply correctly. In most cases you'd be better off 'stealing from the rich' and burning that money rather than distributing it to the rest of society. The only real problem with deflation is that it makes debt an impossible burden to bear (think underwater homes).

Anyway, I'm not going to waste any more time on someone who gets his knowledge from TED talks. Hope you learned something.

Macbeth wrote:

You, an expert on everything about the European Union, does not know who these people are?!

Hollande, Merkel and Cameron are infinitely more important in the euro game than barosso and catherine nobodycares ashton. Why do you always insist on presenting such petty arguments? You never actually engage someone else's points, you either attack them directly or quote one sentence in a wall of text out of context to then hammer on it ad infinitum. You're like the mediocre version of Uzique. Not even that actually.

Last edited by Shocking (2013-02-03 08:10:20)

EU politico-economic issues are great discussion...not in a thread about mass shootings and suicide bombers.

Let's move it to a different thread, aye? Again, great discussion that should continue. In the proper thread.

Can't transfer the info to a new thread...mod tools don't work that way. Already tried.

Uzique The Lesser wrote:

what does that even mean? you are an intellectual peon. why are you casting aspersions?

It was quite clear really.

A former Los Angeles cop who allegedly warned he would target law enforcement in retribution for being fired is now suspected of shooting three officers early Thursday, killing one, authorities said.

The shootings -- which come a day after Irvine, California, police named Christopher Jordan Dorner as the suspect in a double slaying there Sunday --sparked a huge manhunt in Southern California.

It also left officers extremely jittery. According to a senior law enforcement source, two people were wounded when officers in Torrance, California, opened fire on a blue pickup truck after it pulled up in front of a house where they were guarding a fellow officer Dorner had allegedly named as a target.

all over CNN and Fox. He is targeting police officers with an assault rifle.



Cost of freedom

FYI his manifesto is there.  He's a weird one.  Somewhere ATG is probably clapping

Yes, but fuck you. My wife is half mexican and I spent two months in Rwanda last year as a volunteer. Bitch.

Tl;dr

If you are going to go on a killing spree you have to target politicians. Only then will you have the political classe's attention and will people sympathize with your actions.

Otherwise 8/10 creative and unusual but not well targeted.

I like you ATG.

I am dating a Pakistani girl now. What have you been up to?