quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z Wasn't it clear from my statement that I completely disagree with certain value assumptions ?

Dude, now, you've got me totally confused..

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by {b.s.e.} Of course, and you can only skip over so much that I have said before I lose interest in you totally. Do you concede the Gulf of Tonkin was a lie?

youre still not getting it. im not arguing a lack of veracity behind your statement(s), i am denying that they hold any relevance to the other conspiracy theories you like to use them to validate. the fact that you dont see this is also kind've the point

as for the rest of your nonsense,

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN read occrider's posts in THIS THREAD which should answer some of your concerns.

that's all i have to say. your refusal to admit previous errors on this topic is all i need to know about your capacity for honest research (or lack thereof).

edit: you can also follow his explanations in this thread if you really care.

___________________

Last edited by pkcRAISTLIN on Oct-06-2008 at 06:40

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo ...or LazFx's booty hole. but who has that kind of money tho?

Thats right bitches, I am an expensive focking hole!

quote:

Originally posted by {b.s.e.} Could you source that please?

http://www.federalreserve.gov/otherfrb.htm

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z Alright, I'm assuming you're going by this definition of a product or something similar: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Product_(business) By that definition, a vagina and women are products as they can be offered on to a market [aka prostitution]. Nice value assumption there eh? So I wouldn't call something that lacks inherent value a "product." In this case, I gave you an example of something that does have inherent value but I still would not call it a product, perhaps if I was a little fucked up in the head I would, but I choose to avoid repulsive values and ideas.

a woman offers the services of her vagina. in that case i guess it depends on whether you consider a service a product, or whether a product has to be tangible.

While i don't agree with the proposition that a product can (or should) be defined by whether you find the product objectionable, nevertheless, I understand your reasoning.

Shaolin--do you own or use any credit cards?

quote:

Originally posted by Shakka Shaolin--do you own or use any credit cards?

I own one, I don't use it anymore though. Only to build credit (make purchases that I know I have the money to pay for), since the system demands it implicitly. I never remember Adam Smith endorsing credit so I wouldn't call it necessarily capitalistic in nature.

___________________
"The Greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." -Stephen Hawking
"First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out— because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me— and there was no one left to speak out for me." -Martin Niemöller

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z I own one, I don't use it anymore though. Only to build credit (make purchases that I know I have the money to pay for), since the system demands it implicitly. I never remember Adam Smith endorsing credit so I wouldn't call it necessarily capitalistic in nature.

There was no such thing as debt credit when Adam Smith was alive.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z I own one, I don't use it anymore though. Only to build credit (make purchases that I know I have the money to pay for), since the system demands it implicitly. I never remember Adam Smith endorsing credit so I wouldn't call it necessarily capitalistic in nature.

I'm late to the game on this line of commentary, but I would argue that the credit card company offers you a service (to facilitate your purchases in a convenient manner, with the obligation to pay them back some or all of the revolving debt balance on a regular basis, at a cost). i.e. they offer you a product (revolving debt) for a price (the interest rate and fees you pay them, particularly if you do not pay off the balance).

I fucking hate my Amex card.

quote:

Originally posted by Shakka I'm late to the game on this line of commentary, but I would argue that the credit card company offers you a service (to facilitate your purchases in a convenient manner, with the obligation to pay them back some or all of the revolving debt balance on a regular basis, at a cost). i.e. they offer you a product (revolving debt) for a price (the interest rate and fees you pay them, particularly if you do not pay off the balance). I fucking hate my Amex card.

the service they offer is keeping open the line of credit. The product they offer is the money they are giving you to make purchases. I wonder if lines we are drawing are too arbitrary.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton There was no such thing as debt credit when Adam Smith was alive.

Which would also make it harder for him to endorse yes ? But wait a second:

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton People have been using debt for thousands of years...

___________________
"The Greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." -Stephen Hawking
"First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out— because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me— and there was no one left to speak out for me." -Martin Niemöller