The Glade 4.0

Amazing, these idiots out there effecting their idea of vigilante justice while shouting the name of whom they are there to support...a victim of vigilantism.

Do these people even have brains?

_________________
This must be Thursday. I could never get the hang of Thursdays.

No. The brainpower of a human is inversely proportional to the square of the number of people the human is with.

This also explains government and bureaucracy.

_________________
"Aaaah! Emotions are weird!" - Amdee
"... Mirrorshades prevent the forces of normalcy from realizing that one is crazed and possibly dangerous. They are the symbol of the sun-staring visionary, the biker, the rocker, the policeman, and similar outlaws." - Bruce Sterling, preface to Mirrorshades

Ultimately, if Zimmerman is found not guilty of any significant crime, I'll probably call in sick to work the next day just to play it safe, since...you know...the human race still sucks.

It's always curious to me that many conservatives use this kind of logic to support how they think goverments are bad, but somehow magically it doesn't apply to corporations, which are good.

Well, since corporations as they currently exist as entities sanctioned, given rights, and presence by the government ...

Maybe you just never asked enough questions to figure out we started with a root cause analysis.

_________________

Also, my intention was to include corporations with the word "bureaucracy."

_________________
"Aaaah! Emotions are weird!" - Amdee
"... Mirrorshades prevent the forces of normalcy from realizing that one is crazed and possibly dangerous. They are the symbol of the sun-staring visionary, the biker, the rocker, the policeman, and similar outlaws." - Bruce Sterling, preface to Mirrorshades

I doubt few would argue corporations are "good". They merely exist. Unlike government, large free market entities cannot coerce people through law, only through free market forces. Despite liberals' belief of the right to the fruits of another's labor, this is neither tragic nor does it require reconciliation.

Ironically, it is the people's choice to try and rectify said alleged injustice using government that results in governmental collusion with corporations wherein corporations are able to wield power beyond what they naturally have.

_________________
"It's real, grew up in trife life, the times of white lines
The hype vice, murderous nighttimes and knife fights invite crimes" - Nasir Jones

BWAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

Ok, that's pure comedy gold right there.

I'm well aware that most folks on these forums aren't in that camp. However, the larger body of "conservatives" hold up businesses as this shining light while denegrating the government as evil, in their current forms and without any call to make businesses smaller or limit their power.

They hold up marketplaces as a shining light; not businesses. As for the call to make businesses smaller or limiting their power, that's an issue of regulation and information. Your propensity for regulation does not automatically infuse corporations or businesses with the traits you ascribe to them. The same is true for certain opinions of government around here ...

That said, I don't even care about government. That ship done sailed ...

Empire is. Empire persists. Empire consumes.

_________________

Fantastic read.

http://pjmedia.com/victordavishanson/th ... epage=true

_________________
"It is true that democracy undermines freedom when voters believe they can live off of others' productivity, when they modify the commandment: 'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.' The politics of plunder is no doubt destructive of both morality and the division of labor."

Where did you get the idea that I think that regulations infuse traits? Frankly, if corporations or businesses had traits that were centered around being good stewards, we wouldn't need many of the regulations that are out there. The regulations are needed because the companies are incapable or unwilling to regulate themselves.

Do you read English? I'd post the Sam Jackson quote, but this is about 5th or 6th time in the last two weeks you've taken the object of a preposition as the noun it modifies. This isn't an insult by the way; you've repeated the same set of relational operations in other arguments.

That said ...

You basically just said, you believe these companies have these traits and that they would not need regulation without those traits.

Well "traits" is a pretty broad category, but regulation doesn't validate need for regulation or existence of the "wrong doing" that caused the regulation in the first place. Materialism concerns itself predominantly with outcomes; social materialism in particular has a fascinating and problematic eros regarding bad-outcomes: bad-outcomes are always a) someone's fault and b) must be punished.

Your position on regulation, particularly as it relates to Federal policy, the commerce clause, and your moral construct, because I've certain read enough of your prose on this matter to know ...

Your position on regulation is almost wholly driven by that peculiar aspect of the materialist apparatus.

_________________

Did you have a point in all that, other than a personal attack on my English skills or stating what you think my position on regulation is?

I didn't realize that pointing out how you quite egregiously and obviously misread a statement was a personal attack. In fact, I pointed out you've been making that particular grammar mistake with pretty regular frequency. I simply brought it to your attention. Since, however, you feel no need to amend your response, I'll answer your new question.

1. Your position regarding regulation is flawed.

2. Your statement that the existence of regulation validates the need for regulation is ... well, quite simply a product of your operational conflation between legality and morality. Or, if that doesn't offend your 'liberal' sensibilities enough ....

Blame your education. I certainly do.

_________________

Your understanding of my position is flawed.

I'd also like you to point out where you think I misread your statement. I'm not seeing it.

My understanding of your position isn't flawed at all. You made this statement:
I'm sorry. I did not realize you did not make this post. Forgive me for operating under the assumption you were cognizant of the things you type. Of course, since you apparently don't understand your own statements, I'm not going to ask you to distinguish between the word "propensity" as modified by the possessive, specific pronoun "your" and the prepositional clause "for regulation," and the word "regulation." It seems entirely too unreasonable that you may have to differentiate a noun phrase from a constituent word in that phrase, apparently.

_________________

So corporations make law? Or do you believe government does not?

_________________
"It's real, grew up in trife life, the times of white lines
The hype vice, murderous nighttimes and knife fights invite crimes" - Nasir Jones

Haven't you been paying attention? Aizle is unaware he's made the statements in this thread that he's made in this thread.

_________________

The irony of liberals is that they believe businesses and corporations make and enforce the law, but they want to use the law to control businesses and corporations.

_________________
Buckle your pants or they might fall down.

With the state of lobbying in politics, I'm not entirely sure how one would answer this question.

_________________
Well Ali Baba had them forty thieves, Scheherezade had a thousand tales
But master you in luck 'cause up your sleeves you got a brand of magic never fails...
...Mister Aladdin, sir, What will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, Jot it down -You ain't never had a friend like me
█ ♣ █

Neighbors are now saying they saw Zimmerman with "signs of injury" according to Reuters:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/16/us-usa-florida-shooting-idUSBRE83F19Y20120416

_________________
“Strong people are harder to kill than weak people, and more useful in general”. - Mark Rippetoe

Someone gets a cookie.

That seems rather incongruous ...

Lobbying unfairly biases law in favor of the corporations who regulate themselves by buying lawmakers to regulate them because they won't self-regulate?

_________________

It's a vicious cycle.

_________________