Comments

  • Enlightened self interest versus simple altruism.
    That lady was full of crap, as was the idiot making the comments — Cavacava


    Don't most (not all) companies sponsor insurance plans, with perhaps some contributions to the plan but typically very little contribution at the level being discussed here. — Cavacava
    Depends on the country, that's another unfortunate thing that companies are FORCED to make such contributions. It drives costs with salaries to 30-60% higher in many countries with all the additional taxes needed to be paid.

    I who work as an entrepreneur (well self-employed really) get 0 benefits atm. Tough life being an entrepreneur eh? But I'm not complaining, unlike some people.
  • Enlightened self interest versus simple altruism.
    But the clever business person get's around these things by setting up another, 'arms length' company to employ another 49 people with no health insurance, and another, and another... — unenlightened
    Okay but that means additional manpower in terms of accounting and legal issues. So on top of the stress of starting and investing a large amount of money in opening new places employing 49 people, you also have to do it under different companies. A different company starts at 0 revenue. How easy will it be to get a loan on that company, especially if it's a limited liability one? Extremely difficult. If you get a loan on your parent company, then how do you transfer it to the sibling company? Does the sibling company get a 0% interest loan from the parent for that money? See, all this financial juggling isn't easy to do or set up. I have a few crazy ideas for loopholes too, it's not that easy to execute them.

    And then they earn, not a bare living, not an average wage, not 10 times the average wage, not 100 times the average wage, but an obscene and unjustifiable amount. — unenlightened
    Yeah, provided they can execute some very crazy and risky strategies, sure. But that's normal.

    Bernie is right to suggest that healthcare is one of the costs of labour, just as paying them enough to feed and shelter themselves is. And if you can't afford that, you can't afford to employ people. — unenlightened
    I don't think so. An employer should pay what the employee is willing to work for. Why should it be otherwise? I think even minimum wage levels are a problem. It makes starting a business more difficult. I might be willing to hire completely inexperienced people and give them large responsibilities, but obviously I would want to control the payment. We should be making it easy for entrepreneurs, the whole economy should be based around small independent producers. Right now, we're doing everything in our power to make life a hell for the entrepreneur.
  • Stupid debates
    ↪Noblosh
    Riiight, then what was he agreeing with? >:O Your clarification of your previous post? That needed "agreement"? >:O
  • Stupid debates
    So you didn't understand that I was agreeing with the post immediately prior to me typing "Right. I can agree with that"? — Terrapin Station
    Agreeing with what? That post was a clarification and nothing more. What's there to agree with?! >:O
  • Stupid debates
    Right. So I guess you are just trolling. Really bored or something? — Terrapin Station
    :-} That post you're referring was simply a clarification of the previous post, explaining that it isn't as you thought it was. Then after that clarification, you agreed with it. Your attempts at being disingenuous aren't working very well.
  • Stupid debates
    Because you thought it was something it wasn't (well, or at least you trolled as if it was) — Terrapin Station
    What makes you think that?
  • Stupid debates
    What's the post above the one where I wrote "Right. I can agree with that." — Terrapin Station
    Why are you asking me?! Can't you see for yourself? You require eye glasses or what?
  • Stupid debates
    How about simply saying what happened to the post that I was actually agreeing to? — Terrapin Station
    What's the problem mate, you can't see properly or?
  • Enlightened self interest versus simple altruism.
    But there is a glut, and their value does not decline because they rig the market. — unenlightened
    Yes, there is a glut who barely make a living out of it while working 10x harder than your average employee. I posted this in the Shoutbox thread, but basically like this woman here:
  • How I found God
    I see that you're all talk. You and Agustino. — Sapientia
    Okay, so how do we move from talk to action? You expect us to fly over and give you an amazing one-time only experience of God? >:O
  • Stupid debates
    Modest, too. How unusual. — Terrapin Station
    I'm very modest, you seem to have exalted yourself in the position to judge my reading comprehension and critical thinking skills, so let's see if you deserve to be in that position to begin with.
  • Stupid debates
    "Most people on this board have trouble with basic reading comprehension and basic critical thinking skills" haha — Terrapin Station
    Listen, how about we both take a reading comprehension and critical thinking test, and see who scores better. You might be surprised. I'll let you choose the test. And even in my non-native language I'll take you to school.
  • Stupid debates
    Ban those that don't meet the criteria from participating in the debates. But not even this forum does that. — Noblosh
    Right. I can agree with that. — Terrapin Station
    The only moderation I'm in favor of is the prohibition of flooding. <shrugs> — Terrapin Station
  • Discussion: Three Types of Atheism
    ↪Terrapin Station
    >:O >:O >:O Good one mate. Keep living in a dream. Kids, take note, that's what happens when you snort cocaine.
  • Enlightened self interest versus simple altruism.
    ↪unenlightened
    And by the way, you're not addressing the fact that most miners would not even WANT to be entrepreneurs, much less succeed as ones. They'd like to work in an office probably, do less hard work, but they'd still want to make certain bank at the end of the month. So who is at fault that they don't want to do what it takes? It's their choices, and they're paying for them, just like all of us are paying for our choices. They want to - for example - be able to afford having a family, while the entrepreneur has no family and tugs away at it for many many years, only after years of hard toil to be rewarded with riches, that other snitches try to take away from him afterwards. If anyone doesn't have it fair, then it's certainly the entrepreneur.
  • Enlightened self interest versus simple altruism.
    You confirm my point. If you can fail, and fail and fail and then succeed, then failure is not a serious risk. Clearly the penalty for failure is carried by others, who lose their livelihood, their health their pensions, their lives. — unenlightened
    I disagree. Failure is a serious risk, and sets an entrepreneur back for a long time. Most entrepreneurs would quit anyway, and go back to being miners. Those who stick with it, stick because of a certain personality - despite the risks, and the sacrifices that they have to make.
  • Discussion: Three Types of Atheism
    ↪Terrapin Station
    Mate look, I've given you everything you've asked for, including statistics and explanations to account for your own experiences, but apparently you still insist that you know it, that religious people are all lying hypocrites who don't respect their beliefs. That conclusion right there is nuts.

    So far you have presented zero evidence to back up or incline me to believe in your position. Instead you just dismiss statistical evidence based on what people anonymously say as wrong. Okay, even if it's wrong, do you realise how wrong it has to be? The difference between 1/30 and 1/5 is 600%. Okay, 600% is wrong, some of them are lying. Even if the difference was just 50% (3/10), that would still be significant enough to justify my conclusion. So far I have more grounds for holding this, and you have absolutely none. Except your experience, which I've already dealt with in my post explaining Bayesian probability.
  • Enlightened self interest versus simple altruism.
    whereas starving miners, dead miners underground, miners dying of respiratory disease in poverty, are commonplace; these are the people taking the real risks. — unenlightened
    They don't take them as risks. For them it's more risky to spend their time trying to start a business selling chickens from one city to another while having their family starve than to go down the mine and have a fixed pay at the end of the month. I've worked with construction workers in the past, and many people who work such jobs think in these terms. Many would not actually want to go through the fuss of starting and owning a business or doing something else more complicated.

    But starving entrepreneurs who have lost everything,throwing themselves out of their high rise offices — unenlightened
    Are you kidding me? Most entrepreneurs out there fail. Even those who succeed, they fail more times than they are successful. The personality that is required to be a successful entrepreneur is very very different than the common personalities generally found around the world.
  • Discussion: Three Types of Atheism
    I've not only lived in New York--I wasn't born here, I didn't grow up here. And I've traveled extensively, all over the world. — Terrapin Station
    Yeah, I don't quite believe that, unless you've just travelled around the Western world.

    Boards seem to attract particular sorts of people with dysfunctional issues. — Terrapin Station
    Like yourself? >:)
  • The Future Belongs to Christianity?
    No, I don't give a damn about the God conundrum, I just wish all this foolishness surounding it would stop already. — Noblosh
    So you do give a shit about it. Thanks for recognising.
  • The Future Belongs to Christianity?
    ↪Mongrel
    It doesn't follow that another religion would emerge from that.
  • Discussion: Three Types of Atheism
    Yeah, it is true. I've known tons and tons of people who identify as religious, who regularly go to church, etc. I've not known one of them who strictly follows the religion. — Terrapin Station
    That's because you live in New York for God's sake >:O What do you expect mate, honestly?

    in fact, I think that just about every person on this board has some serious dysfunctional issues — Terrapin Station
    LOOOOL >:O so what are you doing hanging around with the retards then?

    Again, people say and do very different things. — Terrapin Station
    SOME people - that doesn't mean everyone is like that. You're just assuming everyone is like that because the folks who live in New York and go to Church are like that. Of course they are - probably the biggest hypocrites live in those cities!
  • Discussion: Three Types of Atheism
    ↪Terrapin Station
    Also take note that the US isn't the whole world. Other parts of the world, thinking now of Latin America, Eastern Europe etc. are witnessing a resurgence in religion.
  • Discussion: Three Types of Atheism
    On that view, you'd have to argue that almost no one is "really religious," — Terrapin Station
    That's not true. There's many folks who adhere to and respect their beliefs, and there is a resurgence of it amongst young people - for example look at me. I rebel against promiscuity, which was the natural state I encountered in the world, just like some rebel against monogamy, which was the natural state they've encountered in the world.
  • Discussion: Three Types of Atheism
    Yes. I'd bet against your conclusion. Because religious views in this regard promote a repression that people seem to rebel against. — Terrapin Station
    And how do they rebel against it mate? By doing away with their religion generally - if not in name, then in deeds. What I'm telling is sensible.

    Of course most of the girls you hooked up with would be religious - no doubts about it for the simple reason that as a whole population, the religious group is much larger than the non-religious. Bayesian probability mate. So you're of course more likely, granted you pick a random woman, that she will be religious and promiscuous, than that she would be atheist and promiscuous, simply because the pool of religious is much larger than the pool of atheists, even though the probability of her being promiscuous is greater in the atheist pool.
  • The Future Belongs to Christianity?
    In fact, why is any decision taken by the demos any better? — Noblosh
    demos? What demos?

    And why is Christian theocracy any better? — Noblosh
    Ah, so then you do give a damn about what happens with religion and atheism in the future.
  • Discussion: Three Types of Atheism
    Right, but one thing you appealed to was anecdotal evidence. That doesn't suggest your conclusion here.

    So what else do you got?     — Terrapin Station
    If you had to make a bet, would you bet against my conclusion or for it, and why?
  • Discussion: Three Types of Atheism
    Most of the females I've been promiscuous with were religious. Most people in general are still religious. A couple of the wildest females I've known seemed to be the most religious--one was a minister's daughter, one was at church more days of the week than not, etc. — Terrapin Station
    Mate of course there's even a lot of religious people who do that, because we live in a culture which promotes and encourages promiscuity as the cool thing. What I'm saying is that LESS religious people than non-religious are going to be promiscuous.

    And by the way, did you ever ask them about how their religious views affected or were related to their behaviour? Many people are "religious" in name only.
  • Discussion: Three Types of Atheism
    ↪Terrapin Station
    If you care about statistics, for example a quick Google results in:
    http://waitingtillmarriage.org/4-cool-statistics-about-abstinence-in-the-usa/
  • The Future Belongs to Christianity?
    Why would I care which denomination will achieve religious monopoly? I don't even buy into religion. — Noblosh
    Because, for example, say Islam achieves it, and people vote for an Islamic theocracy where you have to convert to the religion, then you yourself, who don't accept it, will be forced to join it.
  • The Future Belongs to Christianity?
    A new global religion will emerge sometime in this century and absorb both Islam and Christianity. — Mongrel
    Impossible - very very unlikely. Why would you say that?
  • Discussion: Three Types of Atheism
    ↪Terrapin Station
    You don't need to be rigorous and reliable 100%. You need quick and fast decisions, which can inform and guide your actions. There's not enough time to be 100% rigorous and reliable.

    Let's see Terrapin. Would you be promiscuous and claim to be a Christian believer? Probably not. Why? Because most people would not engage repeatedly (maybe they would once or twice) in activities that are completely contrary to their fundamental beliefs (why? well who the hell wants to think of themselves as dishonest, lying snitches?). So people who are promiscuous would naturally gravitate towards cultures and beliefs systems which permit this. Just like you in fact ;)
  • The Future Belongs to Christianity?
    All I can say is, so what? Why should I give a damn? — Noblosh
    Because you will be living in that world, so you need to take this into account. Maybe you're not happy that this is the case, and you want to change it. Or maybe you're like me, and you're asking yourself how you can help Christianity achieve this.
  • Discussion: Three Types of Atheism
    ↪Terrapin Station
    Use Google. And your own personal knowledge of people. And your intuition ;)
  • Discussion: Three Types of Atheism
    ↪Terrapin Station
    It is a true fact that religious people engage in less sexual licentiousness than atheists though. You're probably a prime example ;) :P
  • Enlightened self interest versus simple altruism.
    'The market' conjures an image of some version of the miner selling ore to the blacksmith, who sells tools to the farmer, who sells food them both, and money or barter regulates supply and demand such that everyone provides value to others and receives equivalent value from others. — unenlightened
    Yes agreed.

    Rather, the mine owner, the landowner, the 'entrepreneurs' literally take a cut between every exchange between others, impoverishing them all. — unenlightened
    Which is fair game unenlightened. The entrepreneur assumed the risk, bought the mine (or rights to exploit its resources), hired the miners (who have a guaranteed pay at the end of the day), negotiated the deals, established a distribution network for the products, hoped the products would sell in sufficient volume, etc.

    Who else should take the biggest cut? The miner? The miner had it easy. All he had to do was take the gold out. His pay was fixed. Whether he did an average job or a fantastic job - he still got paid. The entrepreneur didn't. He absolutely had to make it work.

    Again, the image one is supposed to have of the entrepreneur is of the shopkeeper, or travelling trader, facilitating the exchange between others and taking in exchange the means of their own livelihood. But in fact, the market makers are market fixers. — unenlightened
    I don't follow.

    Not so much a marketplace then, as a battlefield, where rather than add value to the community, one seeks to take value from others. — unenlightened
    I was talking about why countries are poor. Leaders absolutely must have killer instinct, otherwise they cannot capitalise on opportunities and make their countries strong and powerful. Even Ghandi had a very developed killer instinct, otherwise he would have failed to bring down the British Empire. And if they don't, then their countries will be ruled by other countries and subjugated. That's just how the world is. You're either a powerful country, and then you rule over other countries and set the terms - or you're a small country and forced to accept whatever others force you to do in order to be permitted to survive.
  • Discussion: Three Types of Atheism
    Is there unity among Christians or isn't there? — anonymous66
    No, obviously there isn't complete union. But Christianity does have a structure which helps in achieving unity. For example, finding sexually immoral people (those who engage in fornication, etc.) is rarer amongst Catholics than amongst atheists. No human structure is perfect, so of course there will never be a perfect result.
  • Discussion: Three Types of Atheism
    Are Christians in agreement about what the Bible says about sexual orientation? — anonymous66
    Sexual orientations?! As in regarding being gay, lesbian, and stuff like that? Most are, but some obviously aren't.
  • Discussion: Three Types of Atheism
    Are attitudes about sexual orientation concerned with moral behavior? — anonymous66
    Sorry, but what exactly do you mean? What are you referring to by "attitudes about sexual orientation"?
  • Chinese break record for using entanglement for communications
    All I can say is, so what? When I read the newspaper these days, I have the same reaction to a lot of the stories. Why should I give a damn?
Home » Agustino