Namutree

It seems that after I used summon Phantom against Maerwald my summoned Phantom has become permanent. Not even resting removes him. Like, what's up with that? Gotta be a bug. I don't wanna cheat so I'm gonna have to kill it. Poor guy.

How could you even think that isn't Trump???

Yeah, WTF is up with that? If the republicans are for it they need to come out and say so; that way I can be sure not to vote for them. At this rate I'll be voting for Sanders. That'd be strange.

Yeah, establishing your own service would be a pain, but it's not like this due to the existence of already existing private services. This would still be the case even if those private services (like steam) didn't exist. What you seem to be complaining about is the lack of a public service, not that private services exist. Which would mean that this isn't an example of private property being a limiting factor. Private & public services do not exist exclusively to one another. Establishment of a private service(currency processing or distribution of goods) that was open to all or is personal is limited by capital, which is private property. So it is limited by private property. As to a public service for exchange or distribution, we can't really have that with intrusion from government whether that government is a state or a corporation. A public service CAN be established without the government. There is no public service that actually needs the government. What the government does is bring the violence needed for forced participation or suppression; voluntary public participation is still possible.

Yeah, establishing your own service would be a pain, but it's not like this due to the existence of already existing private services. This would still be the case even if those private services (like steam) didn't exist. What you seem to be complaining about is the lack of a public service, not that private services exist. Which would mean that this isn't an example of private property being a limiting factor. Private & public services do not exist exclusively to one another.

Couldn't you just sell your product on your own website or something? I have to be honest this discussion you guys have been having is confusing? Has it got anything to do with Scandinavia ? This conversation is just about private property in general.

Couldn't you just sell your product on your own website or something?

I added the private in their. The simple answer is: I'm not sure what you mean. Care to give an example? Of private property or private property being a limiting entry into a market? Private property being a limiting factor to entry into a market. I think Baro's point was that even if he's generous enough to grant (not that he believes it; this is just a thought exercise) that "proper" free market capitalism could work without devolving into corporatism or being unfair in and of itself; what would be done about the the wealth that has been wrongfully acquired by the previous system? He presents us with two uncomfortable scenarios: A) Redistribute it to get an even playing field and start from scratch. -Don't even know where to begin in addressing why this option is so unpleasant. Suffice to say it'd be messy and likely would be the cause of BIG trouble. B) Just let the past be the past and try to move on allowing those who abused the previous system keep the wealth they've wrongly earned. -This option isn't all too pleasant either. It gives some of the worst of our society an unfair advantage not to mention is just a knife in the eye to justice. Not exactly appealing. To be honest I don't quite have an answer for this myself. It's kind of a no win scenario. I guess I'd default to B) but that answer doesn't seem right. I'd definitely be open to alternatives. I'm interested in Ineth's response cuz I'm kinda stumped. Clearly, I haven't spent enough time thinking about how to transition to a free market society. Or did I misunderstand you all together Baro?

I added the private in their. The simple answer is: I'm not sure what you mean. Care to give an example?

What are you kicking? I'd say a-- but it would be too obvious and not entirely true. Can we just say that you're sufficiently out of bubble gum?

What are you kicking?

You mean "private property" right? Can't really even have a market without at least personal property. As for intellectual property: The whole idea's hogwash. It's a concept that should be disposed of and not practiced.

They're not forms of socialism. They're capitalist whether or not they're eager to admit it. Obviously, there's some socialism there just like everywhere, but far less than normal.

So how would you explain Scandinavia ranking better in competition, ease of making buisness, lower corruption, democratic participation and on and on...? We've had much much stricter government oversight and taxation than you guys for basically 150 years. Shouldn't we have devovled into totalitarian states by now? By your definitions...Scandinavian countries have for the most part free-markets. All of them rank high in freest market ratings I've ever seen. How is socialism incompatible with a market, assuming that by market you mean exchange of goods for money or other goods? I suppose there isn't any innate incompatibility between socialism and markets (although there are no shortage of socialists who oppose markets of any kind); the incompatibility is toward *free* markets which include things like private property and tolerance toward hierarchical institutions like private businesses.

So how would you explain Scandinavia ranking better in competition, ease of making buisness, lower corruption, democratic participation and on and on...? We've had much much stricter government oversight and taxation than you guys for basically 150 years. Shouldn't we have devovled into totalitarian states by now? By your definitions... Scandinavian countries have for the most part free-markets. All of them rank high in freest market ratings I've ever seen.

BTW, what traditions are we going to follow? Cuz I'm trying to praise the sun but it's cloudy outside. Oh Orog I was watching the opening of the American embassy in Cuba and they had this festival and these Cuban dancing girls ...and oh my hat these girls were smoking hot ,,,dude Cuban girls are nice, you should never have left Escaping the Castro regime was worth it I'd imagine.

Those "safe guards" will not prevent monopolies. They will be used to create and protect monopolies. Good business' do that on their own and the few buffoons who don't (when the option to do so is present) wont last long. Saying that the public sector is dysfunctional and the private sector is keeping the economy afloat is like saying that people in your country breathe oxygen.

What's a "Tankie"? I've never heard that term.

http://iremember.ru/memoirs/tankisti/vershinin-nikolay-petrovich/ What does this have to do with Sanders?

It's not what I would have done but it was probably the safest option available. Seeing that they had no actual speech or course of action and have since not used this publicity to actually make their point all they've done is made massive fools of themselves. If Sanders had done anything else it would've reflected worse on him. Nah, he should've never given the mic. He should've done the following: - Pointing at himself, saying: "I'm here for ME" - Then pointing at the audience, saying: "THEY are here for ME" - Finally pointing at the ham-planets, saying: "...and no one is here for YOU. Now, get.off.my.stage." So he should've harnessed his inner Trump?

If he didn't let them ruin the whole thing like they wanted he'd be racist obviously. He's a wealthy old cis gendered mentally sound white man; he's already on thin ice.

This is like the second or third time, no? I think second time.

You answered your own question. Ha! The most "progressive" city in America everyone. Good to see shrieking SJW's are as charming and entitled as ever.

I'm curious as to why this is offensive. Care to elaborate?

Watched the GOP primary debate. Rand Paul was horrible. WTF was wrong with him? He was acting obnoxious and kinda stupid. I hate to admit it, but Trump wasn't bad. He wasn't good, but not bad either. Dang it. First Rand's inability to have a definitive stance on TPP (which implies support for it) and now he makes a fool of himself on national television. At this rate I'll be voting for Sanders, and I don't wanna vote for Sanders.