Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 11/3/12 04:31 PM, Profanity wrote: No, a Trade can't be a type of Capitalism, but a Bully can be a type of Kid.

Yes, Capitalism is a trade, not a type of trade. Trade is a not a type of capitalism, but a smaller word for capitalism.

Again, the only difference is who is distributing the goods. This is ludicrous. They both are solely trades. This is pointless aspectual masturbation.

-----------------Capitalism---------------

-------------------------Trade-----------------------------

--------------------------------My fucks that were given----------------------------------

At 11/3/12 04:43 PM, Profanity wrote: There are many ways to organize an economy which aren't Capitalist, and there are many ways for property to change ownership which aren't Trade, there are many Trades which aren't Capitalist, but there is not Capitalism which doesn't include Trade.

This is sounding more and more like the atheist versus theist argumentative concept. This is where one states one thing, and the other tries to turn the position around 180 degrees, to fit in their position. This applies to how you are saying that not all trades are involved with Capitalism, whereas all of Capitalism is involved with trade. This is foolish and unacceptable!

You are basically saying: ''Herp that derp. The position of distribution is the same as the position of character.''

Last time I checked, you can't use Y to explain Y, then turn the Y inside out to explain X.

At 11/3/12 04:59 PM, Profanity wrote: No, that's just your brain trying to configure the concept after I redefined it for you by using a simple equation.

Honestly, I'm not configuring it. These definitions are beyond disessembled by unwanted bias, and narrow-minded information. Clearly it doesn't take that much wit to realize that Capitalism is the pimp, and trade is the bitch. Look at how trade conceptually procreated the pimp's position. Without the bitch, whence cometh the pimp?

I know what you are saying, and it doesn't make any sense. These definitions are cursed with extreme tunnel vision.

At 11/3/12 05:08 PM, Profanity wrote: I'm sorry you don't get it.

No, you don't get it. These defintions are fuck all reliable.

At 11/3/12 05:23 PM, Profanity wrote: No, it's just really that simple. These are terms for two things which occur on completely different orders of magnitude.

They both have to do with trade, but because one doesn't have to do with the other, it makes them different. Wow, you are a fucking genius. Holy shit, we might as well say that atheists and theists are the same caliber, because one believes there is no God and the other believes there does. Not the fact that there is a claim being made without evidence -- nope, no fucking siree bob.

At 11/3/12 05:26 PM, Insanctuary wrote:

At 11/3/12 05:23 PM, Profanity wrote: No, it's just really that simple. These are terms for two things which occur on completely different orders of magnitude.

They both have to do with trade, but because one doesn't have to do with the other, it makes them different. Wow, you are a fucking genius. Holy shit, we might as well say that atheists and theists are the same caliber, because one believes there is no God and the other believes there does. Not the fact that there is a claim being made without evidence -- nope, no fucking siree bob.

Erm, yeah. What? "The other believe there does"?

By the way, it's completely okay to admit you're wrong. Remember, it's only the internet.

At 11/3/12 05:30 PM, Profanity wrote: They're two completely different words which describe different things. They're not interchangeable; they're not equal.

Name all of the differences, right now.

A list, like this:

1.

2.

3.

...

At 11/3/12 05:40 PM, Profanity wrote: Please take an economics class, or grab a book from the library.

The terms are hideously defined.

Tell me the differences between the two terms with a list like this:

1.

2.

3.

...

If you don't, you only show that not even you understand what you think you understand.

At 11/3/12 05:55 PM, Profanity wrote: You would be laughed out of a high school economics class.

I'm sorry, what?

The definitions are monsterously misconstrued up the definitive ass. What are you on about? There is seriously a major problem with these two definitions and you are too careless to understand this much. I'm going to say it is again.

1. I make the statement that Capitalism is Trade.

2. I explain why:

3. Capitalism came after Trade, and Capitalism is always Trade.

4. Trade does not always invovle Capitalism, but Trade always involves Trade.

5. I beg the question that there is no real difference between the two.

6. I explain why:

7. Trade = Capitalism. What they are involved with =/= Defined terminologies.

8. You whine and complain by repeating the same circular-logic that I'm trying to fucking challenge right now and you keep trying to go back to square 1 -- after I specifically went beyond square 1 to enforce a question against the definition of these terms, how you assume difference and if that difference plays any fucking important roles to begin with.

At 11/3/12 06:06 PM, Profanity wrote: Insanctuary.

trade/trÄd/

Noun:

The action of buying and selling goods and services.

Verb:

Buy and sell goods and services.

cap·i·tal·ism/Ë^kapÉTMtlËOEizÉTMm/

Noun:

An economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit.

Clearly Capitalism is the pimp; and Trade is the bitch. The only difference between these two fucking terms, is one thing: Capitalism can't be used as a verb.

At 11/3/12 03:39 PM, Insanctuary wrote:

At 11/3/12 03:36 PM, Urban-Champion wrote: yeah sure thing Insanctuary whatever you say

Yeah, now fuck off, kid. I have you cornered again, and all you can do is pull the Confuscianism: ''yeah whatever''.

i agreed with you ignorant twat i said yeah sure but to call me mad because you need to keep this troll facade up is what i said "whatever" to

you are horrible at interpreting others

At 11/3/12 06:19 PM, Urban-Champion wrote: you are horrible at interpreting others

Nah... You are hiding the fact I was right.

At 11/3/12 06:29 PM, Insanctuary wrote:

At 11/3/12 06:19 PM, Urban-Champion wrote: you are horrible at interpreting others

Nah... You are hiding the fact I was right.

but you didn't provide evidence so you are wrong

At 11/3/12 06:41 PM, Urban-Champion wrote: but you didn't provide evidence so you are wrong

I didn't provide enough for you to see it as evidence -- no more to the point Science is not enough counter evidence to the religious nut bags.

At 11/3/12 06:43 PM, Insanctuary wrote:

At 11/3/12 06:41 PM, Urban-Champion wrote: but you didn't provide evidence so you are wrong

I didn't provide enough for you to see it as evidence -- no more to the point Science is not enough counter evidence to the religious nut bags.

science can't even prove your heterosexuality because all the tests read negative

At 11/3/12 06:54 PM, Urban-Champion wrote: science can't even prove your heterosexuality because all the tests read negative

That's because your intellect is in the negatives.

At 11/3/12 06:55 PM, Insanctuary wrote:

At 11/3/12 06:54 PM, Urban-Champion wrote: science can't even prove your heterosexuality because all the tests read negative

That's because your intellect is in the negatives.

science isn't my intellect you can't rpove science wrong n*gguh

At 11/3/12 06:58 PM, Urban-Champion wrote: science isn't my intellect you can't rpove science wrong n*gguh

I can prove Science wrong, if the people behind the procedures are obviously scientifically illiterate.

At 11/3/12 06:59 PM, Insanctuary wrote:

At 11/3/12 06:58 PM, Urban-Champion wrote: science isn't my intellect you can't rpove science wrong n*gguh

I cmmph prmmphve Scmmphnce wrmmphng, mmrphf thmmrp pmmrphmrrphple bmmphhmmphnd thmmph prmmphcmmphdmmphres mmphre mmphbvmmphmmphsly scmmphntmmphfmmphcmmphlly mmphllmmpphtmmphrate.

all i hear is your own dick in your mouth speaking more garbled nonsense

At 11/3/12 07:04 PM, Urban-Champion wrote: all i hear is your own dick in your mouth speaking more garbled nonsense

I'm not in the mood, right now.

At 11/3/12 07:08 PM, Insanctuary wrote:

At 11/3/12 07:04 PM, Urban-Champion wrote: all i hear is your own dick in your mouth speaking more garbled nonsense

I'm not in the mood, right now.

ah time for another 7 hour gay porn break for Insanctuary

At 10/29/12 04:24 AM, Insanctuary wrote: 1. Money is worth more than a human being.

I agree. Unfortunately, this is a moral issue, not an economic establishment one. Greed is rampant everywhere - especially in this day in age where you can make money simply by being famous. This problem cannot be fixed by an alternative system, rather, in the personal lives of the subjects in the current system.

2. We allow foreign people, so smaller paychecks come in.

Are you knocking immigration here? I see no problem with the idea of productivity/value. In most cases (in other words, every case outside of monopolies), a company will fail if the product is inadequate. Products are made satisfactory by skilled or unskilled workers, who are hired by the company (usually) through linear programming designed to maximize profit while also optimizing pay/quality ratio. Consumers will not purchase a product that is too cheaply made. Thus, companies will often design in the cheapest way possible - and unfortunately this affects worker's pay.

With the current system, the example company cannot reasonably lower pay below a line where the productivity inhibits profit. Competition also keeps this operating. But, if a company can find workers who will "create" the ideal product for less wage than others, the obvious decision is to hire the cheaper option. I do not see this as a problem with the system.

Blaming immigration/foreign pay is energy better used in arguing with the Republican ideology in Congress.

3. Improper education.

I agree that money has an ugly way of damaging education. But, the solution is simply to increase funding in education and decrease funding in an unnecessary, vestige program such as homeland security. Most money in America is used for entirely ludicrous endeavors (specifically war). The vast majority of internal problems can be solved by turning in our title of Empire and focus ALL of our attention on rebuilding and building the state to its former glory. Education is, in some ways, an issue of its own. Kids are getting dumber - and the hailstorm of new technology and gadgets isn't helping. Money won't solve problems at home either. The family unit is, in my eyes, broken. Discipline is nonexistent and responsibility has been traded for "pediatric psychological explanations" (*cough* ADHD and Aspergers). Most education problems can be solved by America growing the hell up.

5. Economy is getting worse.

The American or world economy? And, could you also define "worse"?

8. We are building robots, so less people.

If this is meant to be negative, I will need more elaboration to understand your reasoning. With the overpopulation issue, why would less people and more "robots" be destructive? In fact, advances in technology could defeat overpopulation altogether with space exploration and, inevitably, interplanetary colonization. Moreover, I'm not seeing the connection with big bad capitalism here (not to say this isn't an interesting subject).

9. Money is made all of the time. It has no real value. Gold has more value than paper money that is being made endlessly.

Actually, no material has any absolute "value". Everything, including gold and paper, is designated with a social value based on how desirable each are. Gold has been "valuable" for centuries simply because of its rarity, beauty, and malleability. It is one of the perfect metals for jewelry (formerly a luxury exclusive to the super-elite). In western culture, paper money serves as a medium between imagined value and physical possession. Of course the paper itself is worthless, but the designated value supersedes the literal desirability of paper.

Rarity is critical in determining value, though. So printing money, by definition, diminishes the actual value AND imagined value of the currency. But, this is a problem in and of itself - one you did not include in your list.

10. Obviously this system can not be trusted, but we continue to entrust our lives into it day after day.

Actually, it can be trusted to sustain life for a temporary period of time. It is obvious that the current system has fundamental flaws in its execution. But, it would be idiotic to simply suspend reality in the interest of "not being fooled". In a way, you agree to be fooled by participating in western society. All social aspects of your life are based on this system whether you like it or not. I recommend you get used to the idea before you wind up on the streets claiming to be the only one with a clue.

11. Drug rings, child prostitution rings, and other people being robbed and brutally killed for this valueless paper.

Is this a complaint on society? Greed as been around since trading.

12. People will do anything for this money -- even if it means to resort to mindless actions and being forced to watch shows on television being horrendously cheesy because the producers pay people to make up bullshit stories to get more viewers.

The television issue is completely subjective and just another example of consumer/producer. Not everyone in show-business is out to make money exclusively. Most, myself included, are actually in it to tell interesting and engaging stories for an audience. Pay is often a secondary luxury. Frankly, if you dislike television, don't watch it.

13. This system was built by children and is becoming worse by the minute.

Actually it was built over many centuries by grown adults and has worked pretty well so far considering how much humanity has accomplished in the last few decades.

Maybe the trail of thought is that all cause and effect based on materials is consider a trade.

Has your mom just died or something? These past few weeks you've been snapping at everyone like some angry 10 year old. I'm not a very bright or peachy person myself, but you need to loosen up a bit.

At 10/29/12 04:24 AM, Insanctuary wrote: Trading goods is fine with me; but trading ourselves, our values, our time, our energy and our fucking lives, for a piss poor system that has the kind of logic that trickle down theories are sure to work, is absolutely insane.

I don't find this to be very relevant. What does it mean to trade our values, time, energy, or lives? For one, time, energy, and life are about the same thing. The only thing we can do with any of those three are invest it in something, and whatever that is will consume all three equally. You can invest your life in a lot of things, from hobbies or passions to a rise to power, or just to monetary gain, but none of them are really more fulfilling than just getting money. There is nothing external that can motivate us; all motivate is essentially self-driven. If money is the only thing that can motivate us, then so be it.

As for values, those are just as manufactured as our ideas of money. Values exist to justify what we do. Money exists to give objects or people value.

1. Money is worth more than a human being.

Neither are worth anything.

2. We allow foreign people, so smaller paychecks come in.

So? What do you care? If you just want more money, are you any different from these people that are trading their 'values and lives' for a shitty system?

3. Improper education.

Has education ever really been great? Our educational system was created during the industrial revolution. It was designed and structured after factories, and with the same purpose: To mass produce something that would be helpful to society. America's education system has been flawed since it was invented.

4. Hypocritical regulations.

Isn't everyone a hypocrite? And how does this have to do with capitalism?

I'm not answering any more of this senseless babble. So our society is flawed. It's weak. So what? You either deal with it or you don't, because no matter how many miraculous changes happen to the world, it's never going to be perfect and there will always be complaints to be made about it. I wouldn't care if America was in the same global state as Syria right now. At least we would be more appreciative of what we had.

any act involving The action of buying and selling goods and services. is trade what is your point?