Terrorism works!

A place where you can chat about anything that isn't to do with games!
Daedalus
Posts: 152
Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2008 7:16 pm
Location: Milwaukee, Wisconsin

Post by Daedalus »

CMoon wrote: 1st--the comment about slavery: Don't be naive. Slavery still exists today.
Don't put words in my mouth. I know damn well that slavery exists today - however, it is no longer legal in any developed nations.
'Employing' people for minimum wage (or less if they are illegals) and giving them nothing beyond that/asking them to apply for welfare to get government insurance. Ha!
There's a huge difference between someone being "forced" to take a government regulated job for economic reasons and someone being forced to work on pain of death. Don't equate the two.

but was phased out because of the timing. Is it just a coincidence that slavery ends in the era of the industrial revolution? Is it just possible that a machine which doesn't have to be housed or fed, might been a realistic alternative to slavery--especially when the idea was becoming unpopular?
In America, the industrial revolution primarily took place in the north. The south's economy was highly dependent on agriculture, and modern advances did little to abate their need for many cheap workers. In fact, slavery was originally banned in the south as a military tactic (Union troops were unable to hold vast stretches of territory, but if they took an area, freed the slaves, and moved on, it would disrupt the southern economy and food supply).
This is not similation. Get ready to destoroy the enemy. Target for the weak points of f**kin' machine. Do your best you have ever done.
User avatar
Lawfer
Posts: 2283
Joined: Fri Dec 01, 2006 3:30 am

Post by Lawfer »

moozooh wrote:You aren't being critical, you're just a bigot.
So what? He can choose to dislike Islam as I do, however the reason he presented for not liking it were not so convicing.
Ex-Cyber
Posts: 1401
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2007 12:43 am

Post by Ex-Cyber »

Daedalus wrote:There's a huge difference between someone being "forced" to take a government regulated job for economic reasons and someone being forced to work on pain of death.
Maybe I'm missing something here, but didn't the government stop guaranteeing full employment about 50 years ago?
User avatar
jpj
Posts: 3670
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2006 4:44 pm

Post by jpj »

Lawfer wrote:
moozooh wrote:You aren't being critical, you're just a bigot.
So what? He can choose to dislike Islam as I do, however the reason he presented for not liking it were not so convicing.
:?
RegalSin wrote:Videogames took my life away like the Natives during colonial times.
User avatar
Lawfer
Posts: 2283
Joined: Fri Dec 01, 2006 3:30 am

Post by Lawfer »

jpj wrote::?
Meaning?
User avatar
CMoon
Posts: 6207
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2005 10:28 pm

Post by CMoon »

Daedalus wrote:
CMoon wrote: 1st--the comment about slavery: Don't be naive. Slavery still exists today.
Don't put words in my mouth. I know damn well that slavery exists today - however, it is no longer legal in any developed nations.
'Employing' people for minimum wage (or less if they are illegals) and giving them nothing beyond that/asking them to apply for welfare to get government insurance. Ha!
There's a huge difference between someone being "forced" to take a government regulated job for economic reasons and someone being forced to work on pain of death. Don't equate the two.
The thing is, I think the two can be equated. Clearly Slavery in the way it is normally used was CAPABLE of being worse, and clearly the abduction was worse, but if you look at what the consequences are for not working, maybe there really isn't a huge difference. *shrugs*

My point being that I don't think slavery is a moral proposition. It is an economic one. With abduction/ownership being illegal in most developed nations, the alternative is to make the slaves come to you :twisted:
Randorama wrote:ban CMoon for being a closet Jerry Falwell cockmonster/Ann Coulter fan, Nijska a bronie (ack! The horror!), and Ed Oscuro being unable to post 100-word arguments without writing 3-pages posts.
Eugenics: you know it's right!
SHMUP sale page.
User avatar
jpj
Posts: 3670
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2006 4:44 pm

Post by jpj »

lawfer: i'm a bit confused why you'd say that. do you mean you dislike the practices of some fundamentalist muslims? or you object to the practices of islamic states? that's one thing. but to say you dislike the actual religion itself...? i'm not sure i understand that
RegalSin wrote:Videogames took my life away like the Natives during colonial times.
User avatar
Stormwatch
Posts: 2327
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2005 1:04 am
Location: Brazil
Contact:

Post by Stormwatch »

I, for one, abhor the very concept of religion.
Image
User avatar
jpj
Posts: 3670
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2006 4:44 pm

Post by jpj »

how do you know you don't like religion if you've never tried one?

i used to feel the same way about the flame-grilled whopper
RegalSin wrote:Videogames took my life away like the Natives during colonial times.
User avatar
antron
Posts: 2861
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2006 7:53 pm
Location: Egret 29, USA

Post by antron »

The new testament of the christian bible says multiple times: "slaves obey your earthly masters"

so, fuck them too.
User avatar
Lawfer
Posts: 2283
Joined: Fri Dec 01, 2006 3:30 am

Post by Lawfer »

jpj wrote:lawfer: i'm a bit confused why you'd say that. do you mean you dislike the practices of some fundamentalist muslims?
No, they are in their own rights.

jpj wrote:or you object to the practices of islamic states?
Not at all, it is their countries so they are in their own rights and I for one enjoy seeing the arab states not giving in to the liberalism that is being forced upon them by the usual suspects.

jpj wrote:that's one thing. but to say you dislike the actual religion itself...? i'm not sure i understand that
What I dislike IS Islam in Europe, they gained their own territories during the Islamic invasions era, they should remain there.
User avatar
Acid King
Posts: 4031
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2005 10:15 pm
Location: Planet Doom's spaceport

Post by Acid King »

CMoon wrote:
The thing is, I think the two can be equated. Clearly Slavery in the way it is normally used was CAPABLE of being worse, and clearly the abduction was worse, but if you look at what the consequences are for not working, maybe there really isn't a huge difference. *shrugs*

My point being that I don't think slavery is a moral proposition. It is an economic one. With abduction/ownership being illegal in most developed nations, the alternative is to make the slaves come to you :twisted:
If that's the stance you take, then slavery is neither a moral nor economic proposition, but incidental to existence. You're always forced to work, in one fashion or another, in order to survive.
Feedback will set you free.
captpain wrote:Basically, the reason people don't like Bakraid is because they are fat and dumb
User avatar
Stormwatch
Posts: 2327
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2005 1:04 am
Location: Brazil
Contact:

Post by Stormwatch »

jpj wrote:how do you know you don't like religion if you've never tried one?
What anyone likes or dislikes does not matter. All that matters is truth. And religions teach as facts things that are not true -- ludicrous supernatural claims for which there is no solid evidence. Worse, they tell you to have "faith" -- ignore the lack of evidence for their claims, ignore the evidence that contradicts their claims. They teach you to not see reality.
Image
User avatar
BulletMagnet
Posts: 14161
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:05 am
Location: Wherever.
Contact:

Post by BulletMagnet »

Acid King wrote:You're always forced to work, in one fashion or another, in order to survive.
Most people, I think, draw a line someplace between what's considered ample compensation for one's labors ("employment") versus the proverbial table scraps which severely limit one's quality of life ("slavery"), not to mention the social factors (though obviously individual ability/willingness to work plays some role...though I doubt many are so unskilled/unmotivated to be completely willing to take many lower-tier jobs) which lead to one person's being able to get a foot in the door of a "career" versus someone else's being more or less doomed to make minimum wage for the rest of his life. Of course, where different people draw said line varies (i.e. that one basketball player who groused about having a "family to feed"), but methinks that very few people equate "having to work for a living," in any form, with "slavery." Methinks that assumption belongs somewhere next to Reagan's legions of Cadillac-driving welfare queens.
What anyone likes or dislikes does not matter. All that matters is truth. And religions teach as facts things that are not true -- ludicrous supernatural claims for which there is no solid evidence.
One could say the same for many conservative economic dogmas. :P Remember, cutting taxes increases revenue under any and all circumstances!
Daedalus
Posts: 152
Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2008 7:16 pm
Location: Milwaukee, Wisconsin

Post by Daedalus »

Lawfer wrote:So what? He can choose to dislike Islam as I do, however the reason he presented for not liking it were not so convicing.
When did I say I dislike Islam? My only argument was that having sex with children is not ethical regardless of how socially acceptable it is.


Just to clarify, I don't like Islam. But what I've written in this topic isn't my reason for disliking it.

how do you know you don't like religion if you've never tried one?
Fallacious argument. You don't have to try everything to make a valid judgment regarding it.

Ex: "How can you say you don't like cocaine without trying it?"
Methinks that assumption belongs somewhere next to Reagan's legions of Cadillac-driving welfare queens.
Ahahahaha
This is not similation. Get ready to destoroy the enemy. Target for the weak points of f**kin' machine. Do your best you have ever done.
User avatar
Acid King
Posts: 4031
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2005 10:15 pm
Location: Planet Doom's spaceport

Post by Acid King »

BulletMagnet wrote: Most people, I think, draw a line someplace between what's considered ample compensation for one's labors ("employment") versus the proverbial table scraps which severely limit one's quality of life ("slavery"), not to mention the social factors which lead to one person's being able to get a foot in the door of a "career" versus someone else's being more or less doomed to make minimum wage for the rest of his life. Of course, where different people draw said line varies, but methinks that very few people equate "having to work for a living," in any form, with "slavery." Methinks that assumption belongs somewhere next to Reagan's legions of Cadillac-driving welfare queens.
That kind of disparity exists without an economic need to make money. If one family lives on good, arable land and one lives on infertile land full of rocks one is going to have to work much harder for much less than the other. The difference between a factory worker making minimum wage and the farmer working the shitty land is the circumstances of their existence, one having to live off the small paycheck and the other surviving off of the meager offerings his land produces.

That's why you can't define slavery by ratio of input to output. Slavery is defined by ownership, not by having to bust ones ass for a small reward.
Feedback will set you free.
captpain wrote:Basically, the reason people don't like Bakraid is because they are fat and dumb
User avatar
Stormwatch
Posts: 2327
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2005 1:04 am
Location: Brazil
Contact:

Post by Stormwatch »

BulletMagnet wrote:
What anyone likes or dislikes does not matter. All that matters is truth. And religions teach as facts things that are not true -- ludicrous supernatural claims for which there is no solid evidence.
One could say the same for many conservative economic dogmas. :P Remember, cutting taxes increases revenue under any and all circumstances!
Precisely! I want the government to get LESS money, to be as lean as possible, and do nothing beyond its core duties.

But that's straying from the main topic of this thread, right? Let's go back to bashing religions.
Image
User avatar
Ed Oscuro
Posts: 18654
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 4:13 pm
Location: uoıʇɐɹnƃıɟuoɔ ɯǝʇsʎs

Post by Ed Oscuro »

I AM GOING TO DETONATE SHMUPS FORUMS AT MIDNIGHT

UNLESS I GET A BAGFUL OF TASTY KITTENS

YOU HAVE THIRTY-THREE MINUTES MR. PHELPS


am i doing it rite?
User avatar
Stormwatch
Posts: 2327
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2005 1:04 am
Location: Brazil
Contact:

Post by Stormwatch »

YUO = FAIL
Image
User avatar
Lawfer
Posts: 2283
Joined: Fri Dec 01, 2006 3:30 am

Post by Lawfer »

Ed Oscuro wrote:I AM GOING TO DETONATE SHMUPS FORUMS AT MIDNIGHT

UNLESS I GET A BAGFUL OF TASTY KITTENS

YOU HAVE THIRTY-THREE MINUTES MR. PHELPS
WRRRRRRRRY!
User avatar
BulletMagnet
Posts: 14161
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:05 am
Location: Wherever.
Contact:

Post by BulletMagnet »

Acid King wrote:Slavery is defined by ownership, not by having to bust ones ass for a small reward.
When you get right down to it this is true, but from there one could ask how hard-and-fast one wants to be when defining "ownership"...does Wal-Mart "own" their employees? Literally, no, but thanks to the near-inescapable situation it puts its workers in (so poor that they can't afford to shop most anyplace else) they're about as close to working for nothing as they can get, since so much of their paycheck ends up back in the boss's hands anyway.

This leads back to the question mentioned earlier, namely, are all these people in such a situation as this simply because they're not "good enough" to make it anyplace else and have more or less earned their fate, or is "institutionalized slavery" not quite as vanquished as we like to think it is, if you're willing to stray a bit from the official historical definition? To put it another way, how did Farmer B end up with the cruddy land while Farmer A got the good plot? Maybe it was just pure chance at work, and nobody's "fault," but than again maybe it wasn't.
But that's straying from the main topic of this thread, right? Let's go back to bashing religions.
Modern conservatism probably ought to be defined as a religion, considering how much it bases its practices on dogmas with no basis in reality (and fanatical devotion to its semi-mythical figureheads).
User avatar
Ed Oscuro
Posts: 18654
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 4:13 pm
Location: uoıʇɐɹnƃıɟuoɔ ɯǝʇsʎs

Post by Ed Oscuro »

oh hey luk what showed up

i got distracted and watched loliz on TeeV though :p
Daedalus
Posts: 152
Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2008 7:16 pm
Location: Milwaukee, Wisconsin

Post by Daedalus »

BulletMagnet wrote:does Wal-Mart "own" their employees? Literally, no, but thanks to the near-inescapable situation it puts its workers in (so poor that they can't afford to shop most anyplace else) they're about as close to working for nothing as they can get, since so much of their paycheck ends up back in the boss's hands anyway.
Very few people are truly stuck in those kinds of jobs.

1. They could get a new job! If you have a solid work history, you can find a job that will pay better than a wal-mart cashier. Landscaping, warehouse work, etc. And for those who are relatively young and not physically impaired, the military is always a good option. Assuming you can speak English, you can find an unskilled labor job that pays more than minimum wage.

2. They could cut down on expenses. Many poor people blow an assload of money on alcohol, cigarettes, lotto tickets, etc. And even luxuries like soda, cable TV, movies, etc can be cut. This can really ease up most budgets, and allow more money for option 3.

3. GO TO SCHOOL! It amazes me how many of the working poor have zero desire for further education. I don't expect these people to get a doctorate in philosophy, but a couple vocational classes are easily affordable and greatly improve their job prospects. And for the people who have their budgets stretched so much that they honestly can not afford a couple classes? Great news - The federal government offers financial assistance.
This is not similation. Get ready to destoroy the enemy. Target for the weak points of f**kin' machine. Do your best you have ever done.
User avatar
JoshF
Posts: 2833
Joined: Thu Nov 23, 2006 11:29 pm
Contact:

Post by JoshF »

Slavery is defined by ownership
Shame then when your favored caste owns the majority of everthing. They own the stores, factories, equipment, and raw materials, etc., all afforded by revenues from graciously taking and selling a workers productive output, because they own that too once it's finished. It's a nice little racket you got going there and I can't wait until you guys take over and give even more liberty and less accountability to these corporations (unless you plan on letting everyone vote for every board of directors, should I start crossing my fingers?)

Very few people are truly stuck in those kinds of jobs.
Really? Alright, you can tell that to my mom then.
They could get a new job!
GET A JOB YA BUM!GET A JOB YA BUM! GET A JOB YA BUM! GET A JOB YA BUM!
Many poor people blow an assload of money on alcohol, cigarettes, lotto tickets, etc
NIGGERS!NIGGERS!NIGGERS!NIGGERS!NIGGERS!NIGGERS!NIGGERS!NIGGERS!NIGGERS!
GO TO SCHOOL!
GO TO SCHOOL YA BUM! (Cool, you payin'? Wal-mart salary sure isn't.)
MegaShock! | @ YouTube | Latest Update: Metal Slug No Up Lever No Miss
Ex-Cyber
Posts: 1401
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2007 12:43 am

Post by Ex-Cyber »

Daedalus wrote:Very few people are truly stuck in those kinds of jobs.

1. They could get a new job! If you have a solid work history, you can find a job that will pay better than a wal-mart cashier. Landscaping, warehouse work, etc. And for those who are relatively young and not physically impaired, the military is always a good option. Assuming you can speak English, you can find an unskilled labor job that pays more than minimum wage.
Wal-Mart is not exactly a top-shelf ingredient for a "solid work history", and a lot of people have physical/medical issues that realistically preclude doing physical labor (which is what most non-retail/grocery "unskilled" labor amounts to) as a full-time occupation.
Daedalus wrote:2. They could cut down on expenses. Many poor people blow an assload of money on alcohol, cigarettes, lotto tickets, etc. And even luxuries like soda, cable TV, movies, etc can be cut. This can really ease up most budgets, and allow more money for option 3.
Way to stereotype and exaggerate. Not entirely unfounded, but necessary stuff like housing, food, medicine, and energy can add up to a lot even if you cut out all the "luxuries" (does that include a diet that won't kill you in 20 years and an apartment that won't make you sick from mold infestation?).
Daedalus wrote:3. GO TO SCHOOL! It amazes me how many of the working poor have zero desire for further education. I don't expect these people to get a doctorate in philosophy, but a couple vocational classes are easily affordable and greatly improve their job prospects.
It's more likely that they simply don't have the time (and/or the schedule flexibility) to seriously pursue education. A lot of poor people are already working multiple jobs just to make ends meet, and even one full-time job can be demanding enough for some that they just don't have the energy to pursue education on top of that. This also assumes that they don't have other obligations like family members to take care of. There are exceptional people out there who somehow cram in family, work, and school (I've known a couple), but you can't take it for granted that anyone can do that just because a few people manage it. Stress has real, physical effects that can't just be willed away, and different people have different capacities for it. It's easy to say "suck it up" when you're not the one having a nervous breakdown.
User avatar
Michaelm
Posts: 1091
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2005 1:13 am
Location: Western ignorant scum country

Post by Michaelm »

Daedalus wrote:3. GO TO SCHOOL! It amazes me how many of the working poor have zero desire for further education. I don't expect these people to get a doctorate in philosophy, but a couple vocational classes are easily affordable and greatly improve their job prospects. And for the people who have their budgets stretched so much that they honestly can not afford a couple classes? Great news - The federal government offers financial assistance.
You really think it is as easy as applying for school and getting your dreamjob ?!?
First, the government will say NO, you've got work, you will be getting work easily. There's is NO need for education.
Now if you've been unemployed for so long then they wont say that.
But you still will not get the education you want.
There will have to be some tests to see if you're not to dumb to count till two and so on.
Then they try to put you in those jobs that are needed the most. These jobs don't have to be what you like but what the government thinks is necessary.

I've tried to get education as such in '98 and I just couldn't get any cause I would get job within 2 weeks they said. There was NO need for education whatsoever they simply said.
Then I got unemployed in the beginning of '06 and this time I completely had it with society and their ugly rules.
If I hadn't said the things I've said to them I would still just have a shitty paid job where I would be easily expansible.
But because I was this mad and ready to do some actions they put a psychologist on me trying to talk me to senses.
Luckily for me it went the other way around. The psychologist talked sense into the people that put the psychologist on me.
Now I'm a licensed .NET programmer and I started my first job as a programmer on August 1 this year.
It took some time to find a job as employers usually only want those that just left school and have 10 years of working experience.
But I got lucky and now have a cool job where I'm also appreciated.

Now I don't have anything against production workers, I've been one myself for 18 years, but it's just damned hard to get a job in that section and be appreciated if you're not already friends with the boss to begin with.

Another thing that should be kept in mind when comparing slavery to the low paid wages we have today is that the slaves where one group. They kept together as a whole. Whereas the common low paid workers of today will not. The common low paid worker will rat on each others asses just to keep the job or become better 'friends' with the boss.
They've got a family to feed, whereas the slaves family was also fed by their owner.

In fact, for the ones with the money, the times we live in now are cheaper then when there was slavery.
When there was slavery new slaves were born on the plant where survival rates are lower then where they are born now. In a hospital that the whole of society pays for.
When there was slavery the 'master' had to feed the children too.
Now the slave has to do that himself. The 'master' just waits until the children are old enough to do work before starting to pay for them.

There are so many pros to working for low wages instead of pure slavery for those with money.
Also today, bosses can sue you for what you've got. Try to do that in the slavery time ;)

EDIT: The only 'positive' thing of all this is that it does not only apply to people with a darker skin.
All errors are intentional but mistakes could have been made.
User avatar
Acid King
Posts: 4031
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2005 10:15 pm
Location: Planet Doom's spaceport

Post by Acid King »

JoshF wrote: Shame then when your favored caste owns the majority of everthing. They own the stores, factories, equipment, and raw materials, etc., all afforded by revenues from graciously taking and selling a workers productive output, because they own that too once it's finished. It's a nice little racket you got going there and I can't wait until you guys take over and give even more liberty and less accountability to these corporations (unless you plan on letting everyone vote for every board of directors, should I start crossing my fingers?)
If anything, the loaded word you want to use is "peasant" not "slave" since it's the means of production that are owned, not the individuals.
(Cool, you payin'? Wal-mart salary sure isn't.)
No, but the government will.
Feedback will set you free.
captpain wrote:Basically, the reason people don't like Bakraid is because they are fat and dumb
User avatar
CMoon
Posts: 6207
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2005 10:28 pm

Post by CMoon »

Why hasn't someone put down the only real way to escape from poverty/slavery...

JOIN THE MILITARY.

Sure, in this day in age you might DIE or you might have some pansy POST-TRAUMATIC-STRESS-DISORDER, but you gotta gamble if you wanna escape from the streets!

Be careful however while you are stationed overseas not to abuse and or rape and or murder the civilians. This generally negates the whole affair.

I wish I could make this post more humorous, but it just...isn't....funny.
Randorama wrote:ban CMoon for being a closet Jerry Falwell cockmonster/Ann Coulter fan, Nijska a bronie (ack! The horror!), and Ed Oscuro being unable to post 100-word arguments without writing 3-pages posts.
Eugenics: you know it's right!
SHMUP sale page.
User avatar
JoshF
Posts: 2833
Joined: Thu Nov 23, 2006 11:29 pm
Contact:

Post by JoshF »

Acid King wrote:No, but the government will.
Actually she has a degree in speech therapy but never did anything with it because raising some kids was more important for some reason. Anyway, you'd think it'd still be beneficial with the boom of the autism industry but I think they'd rather buy an employee out of college instead of one that's sooner to retire.
CMoon wrote:BATTLE MYTHICAL DEMONS WHILE JAMMING TO GODSMACK
Oh man, don't get me started on the Channel One racket.
Last edited by JoshF on Fri Aug 15, 2008 5:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
MegaShock! | @ YouTube | Latest Update: Metal Slug No Up Lever No Miss
User avatar
Acid King
Posts: 4031
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2005 10:15 pm
Location: Planet Doom's spaceport

Post by Acid King »

JoshF wrote: Actually she has a degree in speech therapy but never did anything with it because raising some kids was more important for some reason.
Another sad victim of the male dominated penisocracy.
Feedback will set you free.
captpain wrote:Basically, the reason people don't like Bakraid is because they are fat and dumb
Post Reply