#d megafail

This is a really long one, and painful to get through. But, consider this my contribution to last Sunday's homework question.

[16:32:30] <+Chevrokia> most recent post
[16:32:35] <+Chevrokia> the person has a parental license
[16:33:05] <+Chevrokia> and apparently in their country you can legally start a business before you can legally have kids
[16:33:07] <+Chevrokia> wat
[16:33:32] * +Talost|Kargucagstan has parental licences
[16:33:42] <+Chevrokia> tyranny
[16:33:46] <+Blast> tyranny
[16:33:55] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> it's madness not to
[16:34:03] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> Look at all these impoverished children that have no chance at life
[16:34:07] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> better they not be born
[16:34:09] <+Chevrokia> wat
[16:34:16] <@Catalan> ...
[16:34:28] <@Catalan> And bad parents are what makes that happen?
[16:34:44] <+Blast> http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=16752&p=606194#p606194 libertad amirite chev
[16:34:54] <+Chevrokia> urrite
[16:36:39] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> back. Yes, bad parents are responsible for most of that
[16:36:55] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> the poor, genetically disabled, etc, should not be allowed to breed
[16:37:09] <+Chevrokia> i suppose i should have expected such a response
[16:37:15] <+Blast> wow, you're retarded. and i mean that in a very caring way.
[16:37:30] <+Chevrokia> talost hates the poor
[16:37:33] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> how is it justice to allow someone to be born into such a hell?
[16:37:43] <+Chevrokia> obviously he's a member of the oppressing bourgeoisie class
[16:38:30] <@Catalan> How do you know that the poor live in some type of hell?
[16:38:44] <@Catalan> You only assume they do, because you are incapable of knowing what life is without being pampered.
[16:38:52] <@Catalan> How do you know that the child prefer not to be born?
[16:39:11] <@Catalan> Why not solve the root of the problem, which is government in the first place, and allow every person to make a living wage/
[16:39:41] <@Catalan> Are you telling me that the majority of Africans rather never been born? I think you are sadly mistaken.
[16:39:46] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> That's true, I have not experienced poverty. But I'm not blind. I've seen with my own eyes that they do not have the knowledge or experience to pull themselves out of poverty, and having kids only makes it worse
[16:40:22] <@Catalan> What do you mean they don't have the knowledge or the experience?
[16:40:23] * Crimmond (00starock0@adsl-214-192-115.jax.bellsouth.net) has joined #draftroom
[16:40:31] <@Catalan> You don't have the faintest clue on what it takes to escape poverty.
[16:40:37] <+Chevrokia> because obviously forcing the majority of the earth's population to die off is a good solution
[16:40:38] <+Doom> http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v383/Doomingsland/stug-1.png y/n
[16:40:41] <@Catalan> You assume that the poor has some genetic inability to make money.
[16:40:41] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> For example, studies have shown that the majority of poor people live well beyond their means
[16:40:45] <@Catalan> The only genetic inability is your brain.
[16:40:54] <+Chevrokia> wat doom
[16:40:55] * Catalan sets mode: +v Crimmond
[16:40:58] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> They buy TVs when they should be working, they gambling and drink
[16:41:02] <+Chevrokia> ...
[16:41:04] <+Chevrokia> talost
[16:41:06] <+Chevrokia> that's not poverty
[16:41:08] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> Gamble*
[16:41:16] <@Catalan> And the rich don't squander their money?
[16:41:16] <+Chevrokia> not real poverty
[16:41:21] * +Mondoth|goml|Stormy (Dr_Undersc@utdpat242007.utdallas.edu) Quit (Quit: Mrs. Thatcher used to run the country drunk sometimes, and it was fine! Except when she told the army to 'Chop off Scotland'. -Shelly Winters, Scary go Round)
[16:41:25] <@Catalan> What about the thousands of rich who have squandered their incomes and become poor?
[16:41:26] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> the rich can afford to
[16:41:31] <@Catalan> No they can't.
[16:41:31] <@Catalan> You're an idiot.
[16:41:34] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> I'm not saying they should, but they can
[16:41:38] <@Catalan> If you live beyond your means, that means you're spending more than what you make.
[16:41:40] <@Catalan> You are still taking a net loss.
[16:41:48] <@Catalan> There are thousands of rich who have become poor overnight.
[16:41:48] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> No, I mean gambling and drinking
[16:41:53] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> nobody should live beyond their means
[16:41:57] <@Catalan> You have no idea what you are talking about.
[16:41:58] <@Catalan> No shit.
[16:42:00] <@Catalan> The rich don't gamble?
[16:42:02] <+Chevrokia> talost you realize that the government has historically enabled this to happen with poor people
[16:42:05] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> of course they do
[16:42:09] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> Yes Chev, I do
[16:42:11] <@Catalan> But, the point is that it's not something distinct of the poor to live beyond your means.
[16:42:35] <@Catalan> And, that still does not address teh fact that I'm sure that most poor people who have preferred to be given life than to be aborted.
[16:42:59] <@Catalan> 4/5 of all poor go from the bottom quintile to the top two income quintiles within ten years.
[16:43:12] <@Catalan> There goes your theory on how the poor are incapable of advancing in life.
[16:43:26] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> What I'm saying Cat, is not that the poor live beyond their means more than the rich, although I haven't seen data to support either side, but that the rich have more wiggle room. Also, I'm not advocating abortions, just mandatory sterilization
[16:43:36] <@Catalan> That doesn't make any sense, Talost.
[16:43:43] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> sure it does
[16:43:46] <@Catalan> There is no such thing as wiggle room when you are living beyond your means.
[16:43:48] <@Catalan> No it doesn't.
[16:44:00] <@Catalan> And, like you admit, you have no statistics to show that you are correct.
[16:44:06] <@Catalan> You are making wild and incorrect assumptions.
[16:44:14] <@Catalan> I have already provided you a stastistic
[16:44:15] <+Chevrokia> talost if somebody spends 140% of their income
[16:44:20] <@Catalan> [13:43] 4/5 of all poor go from the bottom quintile to the top two income quintiles within ten years.
[16:44:26] <+Chevrokia> it doesn't matter if their income is $10K a year or $10 million a year
[16:44:32] <+Chevrokia> it's still 140%
[16:44:33] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> prove it Cat
[16:44:34] <@Catalan> You are still MAKING A LOSS
[16:44:49] <@Catalan> Thomas DiLorenzo, "How Capitalism Saved America"
[16:44:56] <@Catalan> That's where the statistic if from.
[16:45:01] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> What I'm saying, Chev, is that if you're wealthy enough to be making $10 m a year, you've got savings, you've got some financial know-how. You can figure out you're losing money
[16:45:06] <+Chevrokia> ...
[16:45:08] <+Chevrokia> you don't get it
[16:45:10] <@Catalan> You're making that assumption.
[16:45:11] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> Cat, site some non-propaganda
[16:45:12] <+Chevrokia> if you're spending beyond your means
[16:45:17] <+Chevrokia> your savings are irrelevant
[16:45:19] <@Catalan> How is it propaganda?
[16:45:21] <@Catalan> You're an idiot.
[16:45:24] <+Chevrokia> because you're losing money
[16:45:27] <@Catalan> You prob. don't even think things through before you say them.
[16:45:37] <@Catalan> The poor don't have savings?
[16:45:38] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> ad hominem much?
[16:45:40] <@Catalan> Fucking Christ
[16:45:51] <@Catalan> How does I not understand proportions?
[16:46:04] <+Chevrokia> also, figuring out you're losing money does not automatically lead to stopping loss of money
[16:46:07] <+Chevrokia> for rich or poor people
[16:46:12] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> that's true, Chev
[16:46:22] <+Chevrokia> you have to make the decision to stop spending money
[16:46:28] <+Chevrokia> which would mean living within your means
[16:46:31] <@Catalan> Something the poor are better at
[16:46:35] <@Catalan> Since it's usually spend or die
[16:47:05] <@Catalan> The majority of poor advance to the top two income quintiles.
[16:47:12] <@Catalan> They are replaced by immigrants, who go through the same cycle.
[16:47:19] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> I want to see the statistics, not the second-hand book it'
[16:47:21] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> s from
[16:47:32] <@Catalan> Those who can't advance are because of government regulation of the social contract between the employer or the employee?
[16:47:32] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> cite*
[16:47:33] <@Catalan> What does it matter?
[16:47:37] <@Catalan> I have already cited the statistics.
[16:47:58] <@Catalan> "I don't trust your source, because it's not convenient and anything pro-Capitalist is obvsly. wrong."
[16:48:03] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> no, you've cited the book you got them from. I want the study. I want to see who the guy who conducted it works for, what's his angle
[16:48:13] <@Catalan> Why don't you read the book and figure it out yourself?
[16:48:18] <@Catalan> You're the one who put up the inane argument.
[16:48:26] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> Because I shouldn't have to read the whole book for one study
[16:48:27] <@Catalan> "I have no statistics, but I'm not going to trust yours either."
[16:48:31] <+Chevrokia> wat
[16:48:33] <@Catalan> ...
[16:48:57] <+Chevrokia> how do you expect any sort of comprehension of the topic, talost?
[16:49:00] <@Catalan> Chev
[16:49:07] <@Catalan> If the poor can't breed, then who works for the rich?
[16:49:14] <+Chevrokia> this is a valid point
[16:49:18] <@Catalan> Every1 in Talost is poor
[16:49:22] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> ideally, there wouldn't be any rich either, but you didn't ask that
[16:49:25] <+Chevrokia> wat
[16:49:27] <@Catalan> wat
[16:49:31] <@Catalan> more nonsense
[16:49:35] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> redistribution
[16:49:39] <+Chevrokia> wat
[16:49:40] <@Catalan> o.O
[16:49:46] * MeneerOseato is now known as MeneerOseato|Out
[16:49:47] <@Catalan> Then how do you produce anything?
[16:49:51] <+Chevrokia> so you want to make everybody equally poor?
[16:49:52] <@Catalan> What is the incentive to invest?
[16:50:01] <+Chevrokia> because that's what income redistribution does
[16:50:01] <@Catalan> Chev, it's an elaborate genocide.
[16:50:11] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> The incentive is that it's illegal not to produce. It's fine if you don't, but you die
[16:50:13] <+Chevrokia> i mean
[16:50:17] <+Chevrokia> you kill off the poor
[16:50:21] <@Catalan> What...
[16:50:24] <+Chevrokia> then make the other people less rich
[16:50:28] <+Chevrokia> which makes them the new poor
[16:50:35] <+Chevrokia> thus you'll have to kill them too
[16:50:40] <@Catalan> That's tantamount to Communism and we all see how well that went.
[16:50:46] <@Catalan> Even the Soviet Union had to cater to the rich.
[16:50:59] <@Catalan> In societies where they didn't, like early colonies in the Americas, everyone tended to die.
[16:51:03] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> that failed because of the leadership, not the concept. Communism isn't viable at all, but Socialism is
[16:51:07] <+Chevrokia> ...
[16:51:12] <@Catalan> http://www.economicthought.net/2009/08/taxes-discourage-production/
[16:51:19] <@Catalan> No, it failed because of the concept.
[16:51:34] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> The concept depends on people being selfless, which we are not
[16:51:34] <@Catalan> Socialism eliminates the incentive to invest in your property.
[16:51:40] <@Catalan> No it doesn't.
[16:51:51] <@Catalan> It depends on the lack of realism.
[16:51:51] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> Norway, Cat. Sweden. Denmark. Happiest people on earth
[16:51:54] <+Chevrokia> ...
[16:51:56] <+Chevrokia> LOL
[16:51:58] <@Catalan> Those are not pure socialists countries.
[16:52:02] <@Catalan> And they are becoming very poor.
[16:52:09] <@Catalan> You are making assumptions while not even researching your position.
[16:52:15] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> please
[16:52:21] <@Catalan> You are continuously spouting nonsense.
[16:52:40] <@Catalan> Next you'll tell me how France has the best health care system in the world.
[16:52:44] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> It's funny, because from my standpoint I'm seeing the same thing. Funny how that works, isn't it?
[16:52:44] <@Catalan> Despite the fact that it's going bankrupt.
[16:52:55] <@Catalan> You are ignoring logical arguments.
[16:53:05] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> In my eyes, you are as well
[16:53:07] <@Catalan> Whenever I state a source you say that it's not partial enough, and dismissi t.
[16:53:16] <@Catalan> [13:50] The incentive is that it's illegal not to produce. It's fine if you don't, but you die
[16:53:18] <@Catalan> That is not logical.
[16:53:21] <@Catalan> [13:51] that failed because of the leadership, not the concept. Communism isn't viable at all, but Socialism is
[16:53:22] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> How so?
[16:53:25] <@Catalan> That is not logical.
[16:53:38] * Preston (Mibbit@IR11104.fau.edu) has joined #draftroom
[16:53:39] <@Catalan> How do you make lack of production illegal?
[16:53:44] <@Catalan> How do you define what lack of production is?
[16:53:48] <@Catalan> You have no economic sense.
[16:53:50] * Doc_evilonaPC (doc.evilon@78.155.225.147) has joined #draftroom
[16:54:01] <+Crimmond> niether do teh French
[16:54:07] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> What do you mean, Cat?
[16:54:08] <+Chevrokia> talost who's going to carry out the production if you kill off the poor
[16:54:10] <+Crimmond> who want to make happiness part of the GDP
[16:54:20] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> They won't all die, Chev
[16:54:22] <+Chevrokia> wat
[16:54:26] <+Doom> http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v383/Doomingsland/stug-1.png < guise D: [16:54:28] <@Catalan> You are making it illegal for them to reproduce.
[16:54:28] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> you work, you live
[16:54:31] <+Chevrokia> you said they shouldn't be able to breed
[16:54:35] <+Chevrokia> eventually they'll die
[16:54:39] <+Chevrokia> and have no children
[16:54:44] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> Right
[16:54:52] <+Chevrokia> thus no factory workers
[16:54:54] * +Doc_evilonavich (doc.evilon@95.83.195.115) Quit (Ping timeout: 180 seconds)
[16:54:57] <@Catalan> The only system that can work is one with unregulated social contracts.
[16:55:01] <@Catalan> That is, Capitalism.
[16:55:09] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> if the jobs available are in the factory, there's factory workers
[16:55:11] <@Catalan> It regulates itself.
[16:55:11] * Mondoth|goml (chatzilla@rrcs-97-77-52-74.sw.biz.rr.com) has joined #draftroom
[16:55:18] <@Catalan> Those that cannot produce to live will either die or live off of charity.
[16:55:29] <@Catalan> But, 99% have already proven that they can work to live.
[16:55:32] * Catalan sets mode: +vvv Doc_evilonaPC Mondoth|goml Preston
[16:55:55] <+Chevrokia> so what exactly is the point of killing off the poor, then, talost?
[16:55:57] <@Catalan> [13:55] if the jobs available are in the factory, there's factory workers <- there has to be an existing pool of labor [16:56:06] <@Catalan> This pool of labor is eradicated if you do not allow them to breed.
[16:56:15] <@Catalan> Chev
[16:56:17] <@Catalan> There is no point
[16:56:22] <@Catalan> It's another one of his misguided theories
[16:56:47] <@Catalan> Like the one where he said he didn't understand why rape was worse than assault.
[16:56:52] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> What I'm advocating is first, total redistribution. If you cannot work, you are fully supported. If you can work, you do. If you can and you don't, you are killed. Everyone that lives, works, so there's people to do the jobs
[16:56:58] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> I do understand now, Cat
[16:57:00] <+Chevrokia> um
[16:57:06] <+Chevrokia> "if you cannot work"
[16:57:10] * Franberry (chatzilla@190.244.69.84) has joined #draftroom
[16:57:10] <@Catalan> What does total redistribution mean?
[16:57:11] <+Chevrokia> what are the definitions of this
[16:57:18] * ChanServ sets mode: +v Franberry
[16:57:22] <@Catalan> Who will make new jobs for those who can't work if they are having their income redistributed?
[16:57:24] * +TheHURD (syku@62.6.161.170) Quit (Quit: Osama's time machine: President Gore concerned.)
[16:57:25] <@Catalan> The incentive to invest is gone.
[16:57:29] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> Chev, mentally handicapped or something to the point of not being able to comprehend things
[16:57:43] <+Franberry> Catalan> Who will make new jobs for those who can't work if they are having their income redistributed? <---- Peron! [16:57:46] <@Catalan> What about those who can't find employment because of income redistribution?
[16:57:54] <+Skadrii> we should just kill all the mentally handicapped people. they're clearly not contributing anything to society and deserve to die.
[16:58:02] <@Catalan> 20% of the American population should have been killed during the Great Depression.
[16:58:02] <+Franberry> Talost wats going on
[16:58:12] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> I'm arguing with Catalan and Chev, Fran
[16:58:18] <@Catalan> Or, alternatively, those statistics are lies, given that if Talost is right then FDR's income redistribution should have solved the Great Depression.
[16:58:19] <+Franberry> do you want to kill the handicapped
[16:58:20] <@Catalan> 9_9
[16:58:21] <+Unreal229> so you would rather kill potentially useful people than ones who are certain to be a long term drain?
[16:58:28] <@Catalan> At one point there was 90% income tax.
[16:58:31] <@Catalan> on the rich
[16:58:45] <@Catalan> I don't understand, those who can't work will die anyways or will be supported by charity.
[16:58:49] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> No, I'm not out to kill the handicapped. Like I said, let them be fully supported. But no breeding them
[16:58:54] <+Chevrokia> wat
[16:58:55] <+Franberry> what
[16:58:56] <+Chevrokia> h/o
[16:58:59] <@Catalan> lmao
[16:59:03] <+Franberry> So you want to sterilize the handicapped?
[16:59:08] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> everyone
[16:59:12] <+Chevrokia> the poor, genetically disabled, etc, should not be allowed to breed
[16:59:12] <+Skadrii> [16:58] so you would rather kill potentially useful people than ones who are certain to be a long term drain? <<< kill them all, unreal. it's the only way to be sure our society is 100% efficient. [16:59:15] <@Catalan> o.O
[16:59:23] <+Chevrokia> you just said earlier
[16:59:29] <@Catalan> So, we all know that Kargucagstan is very poor now.
[16:59:30] <+Franberry> Talost|Kargucagstan> everyone <--- /what/ [16:59:32] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> What started this conversation is that I want to sterilize *everyone* and issue licenses to breed
[16:59:32] <+Unreal229> not what i said Skadrii
[16:59:38] <+Chevrokia> um
[16:59:40] <+Skadrii> I mean, why stop them from breeding? That's just inhumane. It'd be less cruel to kill them.
[16:59:42] <+Chevrokia> if they're sterilized
[16:59:44] <@Catalan> This is too funny.
[16:59:44] <+Chevrokia> how do they breed
[16:59:49] <+Franberry> Tube babies
[16:59:50] <+Chevrokia> HOW IS BABBY FORMED
[16:59:55] <@Catalan> I don't think he thinks things through.
[16:59:59] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> Most sterilizations are reversable, that's what I'm advocating
[17:00:00] <+Franberry> Chev you can do it artificially
[17:00:09] <+Skadrii> IVF, chev
[17:00:15] <+Franberry> have DNA, ovaries and sperm reserves
[17:00:15] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> no, no
[17:00:23] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> That's not what I'm saying at all
[17:00:24] <+Franberry> Its p.crazy but its doable
[17:00:25] <+Unreal229> so there would be a black market for the precess to reverse sterilisations :P
[17:00:29] <+Skadrii> oh, you mean, like, castrate the poor?
[17:00:31] <+Unreal229> *process
[17:00:35] <+Chevrokia> yeah skad
[17:00:37] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> Yup Unreal, and those that partake, die
[17:00:38] <+Skadrii> something irreversible like that?
[17:00:41] <+Chevrokia> talost wants to kill off the poor
[17:00:44] <@Catalan> So we know that his government regulates beeding and that there is no economic growth because profit is completely redistributed.
[17:00:53] <@Catalan> http://www.economicthought.net/2009/08/taxes-discourage-production/
[17:00:58] <+Unreal229> ZOMG! Talost is the combine from Half-Life!
[17:01:09] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> Stalkers o/o/o/
[17:01:24] <+Franberry> You realize that a lot of the reason that people in low income brackets work hard is because they know they'll never get anything but if they save up enough they might be able to give their kid a better life?
[17:01:25] <+Unreal229> nb: combine lose!
[17:01:27] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> (those were the guys with the stilt legs)
[17:01:37] <+Franberry> if they dont have kids then they're just gonna get drunk
[17:01:40] <+Unreal229> sort of
[17:01:44] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> the problem is Fran, a lot of the poor don't work hard
[17:01:47] <+Skadrii> [17:00] So we know that his government regulates beeding and that there is no economic growth because profit is completely redistributed. <<< sounds perfectly logical, catalan [17:01:50] <@Catalan> Fran, 4/5 of the poor rise to the top two income brackets in the USA.
[17:01:54] <+Skadrii> why do you hate tyranny? I mean, freedom?
[17:02:13] <+Skadrii> [17:01] the problem is Fran, a lot of the poor don't work hard <<< [citation needed] [17:02:13] <+Franberry> Catalan> Fran, 4/5 of the poor rise to the top two income brackets in the USA. <---- what [17:02:18] <+Chevrokia> it's ironic that somebody who believes socialism can work is in favor of killing off the poor
[17:02:22] <@Catalan> They are replaced by immigrants
[17:02:33] <+Franberry> Talost|Kargucagstan> the problem is Fran, a lot of the poor don't work hard <--- Show me where this happens, honestly [17:02:35] <@Catalan> I'm trying to find the exact quote
[17:02:38] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> the poor that don't work hard*
[17:02:41] <@Catalan> He can't
[17:02:45] <@Catalan> He's making the assumption
[17:02:47] <+Allanea> Fran
[17:02:48] <+Allanea> welfare
[17:02:50] <+Allanea> that is all
[17:02:51] <+Chevrokia> aki r u here
[17:02:53] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> To be honest, no, I can't. It's my own observation
[17:02:54] <+Franberry> Any place the poor "don't work hard" is because they have no rights and are serfs
[17:02:58] <@Catalan> So income redistribution is supposed to hel[?
[17:03:14] <+Chevrokia> yeah i brought that up allanea
[17:03:20] <+Franberry> why would you redistribute the money Mac, if they would all die
[17:03:21] <+Skadrii> give money to them because they don't work? excellent logical thinking, talost
[17:03:25] <+Chevrokia> not so specifically
[17:03:31] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> no, kill them if they don't work
[17:03:40] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> otherwise they're just a drain on society
[17:03:40] <@Catalan> No
[17:03:40] <+Chevrokia> but i said that so many of the problems of the poor are because of government not due to lack of it
[17:03:42] <+Akimonad> yeh
[17:03:43] <+Skadrii> and then give the money to their corpses?
[17:03:44] <+Akimonad> i is
[17:03:48] <@Catalan> you said that they would be supported by income redistribution
[17:03:48] <+Akimonad> playin RCT2
[17:03:49] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> total utilitarianism
[17:03:58] <+Chevrokia> they're talking about boehner again
[17:04:02] <+Akimonad> lulz
[17:04:11] <@Catalan> Imagine all those who will die because companies can't invest.
[17:04:17] <+Chevrokia> apparently he's against this bill to condemn the guy who yelled "you lie" at obama
[17:04:19] <+Akimonad> they must <3 him [17:04:20] <@Catalan> So there's no employment.
[17:04:24] <+Akimonad> well yeah
[17:04:33] <+Akimonad> which is basically to distract from the healthcare thing
[17:04:39] <+Chevrokia> talost you're not advocating utilitarianism
[17:04:40] <+Skadrii> [17:03] total utilitarianism <<< how much have you actually read about utilitarianism? are you actually familiar with mill, for instance? [17:04:41] <+Chevrokia> at all
[17:04:44] <+Akimonad> i mean ffs he apologized and obama was like "w/e bro"
[17:05:01] <+Franberry> This doesnt seem like its very well thought out
[17:05:11] <+Franberry> seems like its your usual 16 year old bitching at "them lazy people"
[17:05:16] <+Skadrii> pretty much
[17:05:33] <+Franberry> LOL
[17:05:35] <+Franberry> LOL
[17:05:38] <+Franberry> "Obama Bin Lyin"
[17:05:45] <+Chevrokia> XD
[17:05:54] <+Franberry> new #d motto
[17:05:54] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> back
[17:05:59] <+Unreal229> out of curiosity Talost, how would the deathsquads be paid? would they not be a bigger drain on society to equip?
[17:06:00] <@Catalan> Skadrii, I'm pretty sure he has done absolutely no reading on any of the subjects brought up by this discussion.
[17:06:01] <+Skadrii> actual utilitarianism has nothing to do with killing people. in fact, that's rather detrimental to its overall philosophy.
[17:06:11] * Leistung (Leistung@76-195-45-75.lightspeed.wlfrct.sbcglobal.net) has joined #draftroom
[17:06:15] <+Skadrii> which is specifically based upon the "greatest happiness principle".
[17:06:19] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> Hardly death squads. Police arrest criminals like any other
[17:06:41] <+Unreal229> and these people who know they face death willingly give in?
[17:06:49] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> Utilitarianism is the belief that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few
[17:06:59] <+Chevrokia> so um
[17:07:07] <+Chevrokia> since there are more poor people than rich people
[17:07:11] <@Catalan> But you're policy is not utilitarian.
[17:07:17] <+Franberry> Talost|Kargucagstan> Hardly death squads. Police arrest criminals like any other <-- you could say this about the NKVD, the Gestapo, or the Inquisition [17:07:18] <@Catalan> You are coercing your entire population to poverty.
[17:07:20] <+Chevrokia> how does killing off the poor fit in with that
[17:07:32] <+Skadrii> [17:06] Utilitarianism is the belief that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few <<< not precisely, no. again, have you actually read, say, /Utilitarianism/? [17:07:55] <@Catalan> Cox and Alm have demonstrated the upward mobility of the American labor force - and the uselessness of static income distrubition statistics - as clearly as anyone has. To look at a representative socioeconomic sample of American society, the two Federal Reserve Board researchers used a Uni. of Michinga tracking study of more than 50,000 Americans that has been going on since 1968...
[17:07:57] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> I'm not killing off the poor. Who said that? I'm stopping them from breeding unless they can provide for their child. And the government will help with the money it seizes from the rich
[17:07:57] <+Franberry> "Utilitarianism is the idea that the moral worth of an action is determined solely by its contribution to overall utility: that is, its contribution to happiness or pleasure as summed among all people. "
[17:08:04] So can I just use it?
[17:08:05] <+Franberry> "Utilitarianism is the idea that the moral worth of an action is determined solely by its contribution to overall utility: that is, its contribution to happiness or pleasure as summed among all people. " <--- YOU WANT TO STERILIZE EVERYONE [17:08:09] <+Franberry> MINUS HAPPINESS
[17:08:12] <@Catalan> Only 5 percent of families in the bottom fifth of the income distribution in 1975 were still there in 1991.
[17:08:50] <@Catalan> Among the second poorest quintile in 1975, more than 70 percent had moved to a higher quintil by 1991, and one-fourth reached the top 20 percent barket.
[17:08:51] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> at first, yes, Fran. It's like Tyler Durden said, I'll carry you to the end, kicking and screaming, and in the end you'll thank me
[17:09:00] <+Chevrokia> wat
[17:09:17] <@Catalan> With education and training the rise up the incme brackets can be very swift: more than half of the families who were in the bottom 20 percent in 1975 made it to a higher bracket within FOUR years.
[17:09:30] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> and those people would be given licenses
[17:09:48] <+Franberry> Talost|Kargucagstan> at first, yes, Fran. It's like Tyler Durden said, I'll carry you to the end, kicking and screaming, and in the end you'll thank me <--- Fight Club? [17:09:49] <@Catalan> The study and the source are
[17:09:53] <+Skadrii> [17:08] I'm not killing off the poor. Who said that? I'm stopping them from breeding unless they can provide for their child. And the government will help with the money it seizes from the rich <<< that's one well thought-out philosophy you have there, 15-year-old future-tyrant [17:09:54] <@Catalan> Cox and Alm, "Myths of Rich and Poor"
[17:09:58] <+Franberry> Shouldn't you be citing some sort of scholar
[17:10:15] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> I could, but I'm in a Fight Club mood right now since I'm reading it
[17:10:19] <+Blast> xd czard
[17:10:33] <+Skadrii> nonsense fran, fight club is a work of immense philosophical importance, as everyone should know
[17:10:45] * Catalan sets mode: +v Leistung
[17:10:51] <+Franberry> Colombia has no tanks :O
[17:10:54] <@Catalan> Talost and Mugabe are on about the same intellectual level.
[17:10:55] <+Blast> [17:10:33] <+Skadrii> nonsense fran, fight club is a work of immense philosophical importance, as everyone should know <-- Just like everything else. [17:10:57] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> it really is a rather interesting book
[17:11:00] <+Blast> amirite?
[17:11:04] <+Skadrii> why, the American Journal of Philosophy regularly cites Fight Club in the articles it runs
[17:11:06] <+Skadrii> urrite blast
[17:11:14] <+Talost|Kargucagstan> hey, wisdom is wisdom

The obvious conclusion is to burn Fight Club. Also, all new books will have creativity totally redistributed.