Economy Rigged Against Everyone but the Ultra Rich

[Slanzar]

so anything more you want to say? to try and act all big?

[Slanzar]

im waiting…?..

[CookyKim]

naw i think you can ■■■■ right off see the one being a child is you looking at your replies like these whats funny is i have not seen not one mention on my last post i posted here because you know im right so maybe you can “run along with your tail between your legs”

Wow so mad you forgot to punctuate.

And I thought you wanted to:

leave me out of it

so you should:

Run along now, with your tails in between your legs.

---

so anything more you want to say? to try and act all big?

im waiting…?..

Wow so mad and impatient.

[Slanzar]

no you see when you say ■■■■ like run along now with your tail between your legs you are being whats called passive aggressive and a douche

the right thing to say to avoid ANY of this was to say ok i wont mention your name anymore but you didnt and here we are spamming a thread needlessly because you think you are “winning” the argument which you really arent because as i said A FEW TIMES ALREADY out view points are different and we wont see eye to eye but no you wont take that answer because you want to continue this bickering right?

@STAFF_Ines @STAFF_Ethan @STAFF_J @Staff_Julie @STAFF_John @STAFF_Shawn

[CookyKim]

Not sure who is:

a douche

in the end I still DONT GIVE A FLYING HOO HA

im just out right telling you to F U C K O F F

do this the childish way

I really don’t give a ■■■■.

i think you can ■■■■ right off

when you say ■■■■

---

You wanted to:

leave me out of it

So I suggested:

1. you don’t have to reply
2. you can mute the thread

But now you want [quote=“Vonleo, post:40, topic:156510”]
this thread to be locked
[/quote]

So that you can:

clasp you hands over your ears pretending you can’t hear them

---

Instead you should’ve

Run along now, with your tails in between your legs.

and not be:

passive aggressive

---

Also the thread was perfectly civil until you started:

spamming a thread needlessly

[gorathff]

I agree with you in general, but in my opinion some points are wrong.

Improving social security of old aged people by linking their income to the societies gdp would greatly reduce population growth especially in 3rd world countries ( why is that a good thing? we are fuking 7 billion people currently ravaging the planet for all it’s got… wake the fk up!)

The problem lies not in overpopulation, but in uneven and unfair redistribution material goods produced by humanity. In the first place people tend to have less children in 1st world countries because cost of raising them escalates greatly and results in quality of life reduction. In 3rd world countries having alot of children is the only way to guarantee your retirement.

This brings us to the next problem. Our current democracy is a failed concept.

The point of democracy is not the choice between several candidates, but responsibility of elected representatives before society. So in a sense democracy works perfectly, the only catch is that in capitalist society, capitalist are the ruling class, and elected representatives hold responsibility before capitalists first and other people second.

interest rates are basically the devils work in a capitalistic system

Indeed, and i want to elaborate this further. Capitalism can prosper only while market is expanding. Since Earth is finite, market is finite as well. Since 1991 after fall of USSR, we have single currency market, and that market is already full. The other option for capitalism to expand is to increase consumption by providing people with cheap conumer loans. And iirc it was Carter’s administration program at first, which was later implemented by Reagan, thus given birth to reaganomics. Now we can see that since 80s, FRS was constantly decreasing discount rate from 19% to almost 0 in 2008, which means this resource is almost exausted too.