Not really, it's more that our view of wealth, or value really, is distorted. Value is relative, but we try and and characterize it as some sort of fixed property.Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeKhan
Printable View
Not really, it's more that our view of wealth, or value really, is distorted. Value is relative, but we try and and characterize it as some sort of fixed property.Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeKhan
No it wouldn't. You're just getting hijacked by conventional (academic) definitions of gain/loss/wealth, and associated "numbers".Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Nothing dynamic ever moves in equal tandem. That's why carry trades and derivatives and currency plays can "create wealth" without an equal "destruction of wealth".
Half the people in the country use horses for transportation. For whatever reason, horses become obsolete. At most, people can sell their horses for 1/10 their previous value. Has wealth in the society decreased?
Professor Loki, your analogy sucks. Mostly because (if the economy in general tanks that bad and that suddenly) horses can be killed and eaten, their hides can be used as coats, their hooves can be ground into gelatin flour, which might theoretically spawn some new consumer industry).Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Cars, homes, stocks or 401Ks can't become food. Zero value on paper is still zero value. Tho I suppose homes and cars have enough raw materials to burn or sell or trade (copper, PVC, wood) we still can't eat them.
Socialist = UnfamiliarQuote:
Originally Posted by Being
Examples:
Aliens are socialists.
Climate change is socialist.
Having decent health in US is socialist.
Even US indians could be socialists...
Of course, bank bailout is not a socialist subsidy because bailouts have happened more often than people think so they are quite familiar, and war is not socialist government intervention since war is a familiar concept since 1941.
Your fears came late...Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeKhan
As if Things Weren't Bad Enough, Russian Professor Predicts End of U.S.
I woudn't say 2010. I'd say 2012... The end of world economy.Quote:
In Moscow, Igor Panarin's Forecasts Are All the Rage; America 'Disintegrates' in 2010
Finally, anarchy. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by ar81
Oh for fuck's sake. Why do people take any legitimate beef to the extreme of zomg it's a conspiracy, or oh noes it's even worse----it's teh end of the world!? Should we have a teatime and twitter about this?
:mad:
Have the two people above you ever said anything that wasn't inane?
Hey! Keep it up and I will defriend you. :mad:Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Sometimes you say inane things too, but it's not held against you.
What, are you keeping post-it notes by your computer or something?
The blind leading the blind I guess.
Not really. I don't know why, but you seem to have a grudge against certain people. They can say one profound thing you may agree with, but you'll bring up that one time, or several times, a long time ago, when they said something stupid and you disagreed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
You're a scorekeeper.
Some people make sense some of the time. Some people make sense most of the time. And yet others never make sense. That's as far as my "score-keeping" goes. I think you'll find that my judgment on the two people above is shared by most people here.
Is this like "even a stopped clock is correct twice a day" but you wouldn't call them clocks?Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Dunno Loki, it's not like they're spamming up the home front page that was originally intended to be an intellectual blog. (Though I don't really know that, since I never look there).
Even kat makes some sense, sometimes.
Group flaw?Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Did I ever suggest they shouldn't be allowed to post?Quote:
Originally Posted by GGT
Nope. Did I ever suggest you suggested that?Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Quote:
Originally Posted by GGT
Quote:
Originally Posted by GGT
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Quote:
Originally Posted by Being
I can't read most of what AR posts. Its wierdly constructed and doesn't make sense unless you really think about it. And that's too much work. Being used to seem to post seriously. Past few days he's been spamming a lot. Probably drunk.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Not yet, but I'm working on it. :downcast:Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeKhan
You are taking it a bit too far Loki. If their posts never have anything worth reading, put them on ignore like a normal person. Stop filling the forum with replies that people who had the sense to have already ignored them don't want to read.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Ignore lists are for wussies
(I give fifty fifty odds that this post will be ironic)
You haven't made it back on there, yet. I figure it's only a matter of time, though. And you usually don't go on crusades where you reply to pretty much every post someone makes just to say you don't like them, the way Loki is doing right now. He is presenting a perfect example of when an ignore list should be used.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nessus
Of course it is
Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nessus
Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy
Loki spent a lot of time on my ignore list way back when. But then I learned how not to care. (thank you Nessus) I now more or less agree with Nessus on this. But that could be just a fad.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nessus
Why would you block loki? At least hes almost always interesting and rarely stupid. Annoying and infuriating to debate, i grant you, but at least hes not stupid.
I fixed that problem shortly after making that post.Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy
Leaving out context and using the enter key in cunning ways, you can now discuss yourself. :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by Spawnie
Try this at home!