/jp/ - Otaku Culture

File: 159 KB, 750x644, 1232218665056.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Wed Dec 16 22:32:48 2009 No.3918856 [Reply] [Original]

My plan to live as cheaply and comfortably as possible.

This is my goal in life, I simply don't want to work for a living. When you think about it, life is just WAY too fucking short to spend most of your time slaving at a job. There are so few things I want in life but just the necessary things like food and shelter that require money, and just that requires me to bust my ass for 40 hours a week while my life slowly drains away? Fuck. That.

A common saying is "time is money", I think of it the other way around, "money is time". Time is your most valuable thing, it's very limited and once it's gone you are done with life. My plan involves reducing the need for money in order to maximize the time I have to do other things with my life.

First, I have to buy a house. The cheaper the better. As long as I can pay for the costs of moving and cover the mortgage for a few months, I'm good. I will continue to live cheaply here only consuming enough food to stay healthy, paying for basic cable and internet and electricity.

Then, I'll offer to rent the house out to as many other people as I can at a cheap rate. As many people as can fit in the bedrooms. I'd provide sleeping mats instead of beds to accommodate more people. Since housing is such an issue in most places, I don't think it'd be a problem to find people willing to put up with sharing a house full of 6-8 people or so. With enough people living there, it should completely cover my monthly mortage, taxes, utilities and other costs.

Anonymous Wed Dec 16 22:32:48 2009 No.3918858

In the mean time, I'd still work in order to save up money because this situation probably won't last forever, and I'd store as much money as possible away into a tax-free savings account. I'd soon move up to only working part time rather than full time and spend more time enjoying life. Eventually, my tenants will pay off my mortage and I'll have enough yearly interest coming in from my savings that I can easily live off that and not have to work at all.

What does /jp/ think of my plan? I suppose some of you are perfectly happy with your jobs and will try to convince me that living without a job is the worst way to live possible. Think about it though, do you have other things you'd rather be doing than going to work? Can you predict when you'll be able to do all of those things? if you are working a full time job, chances are you can't.

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 16 22:33:48 2009 No.3918862 File: 5 KB, 237x265, fascinating2.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 16 22:35:48 2009 No.3918870 >>3918856 shit plan

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 16 22:39:48 2009 No.3918888 >>3918870 How so?

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 16 22:39:48 2009 No.3918889 You want to maximize your time? Become an ad king.

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 16 22:41:48 2009 No.3918896 Work is the basis of society. You would do well to remember that.

Anonymous Wed Dec 16 22:41:48 2009 No.3918898

Not trying to bring you down or anything, but I have some questions. I wouldn't mind giving this a shot.

-Where do you plan on working? Do you have a college or highschool degree?

-About the people who you rent your home out too, what if they have some nasty shit going on you don't know about? People looking for dirt cheap homes won't exactly be clean-shaved business men.

-What about medical bills? Insurance? That costs some dough.

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 16 22:45:48 2009 No.3918918 If you don't mind having any respect or financial security to speak of, then sure, you can probably get by like that.

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 16 22:45:48 2009 No.3918920 >>3918856 you dont want your life to slowly drain away? your on 4cha bud

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 16 22:47:48 2009 No.3918927 >>3918858 >>3918856 So you plan to play life on Hard mode? Why not just go easy modo and start a bussiness? something you could dedicate a few years to and then leave it to someone else while still receiving profit.

Anonymous Wed Dec 16 22:48:48 2009 No.3918932

Learn to cook and try to get raw ingredients wholesale. A friend who runs a business can come in handy there. Gardening is a good hobby to have if you want to save on food.
Choose where you live carefully. You'll want a place with low property tax. You might want to hold off longer if you're in the US since it looks like there could be a second crash. There are a lot of vacant houses that aren't on the market. Don't know the situation elsewhere.
I'd be hesitant to plan for that many roommates. More people mean more opportunities for problems.

Anonymous Wed Dec 16 22:56:48 2009 No.3918967

If you are living in America you should be grateful. There are so many shit countries like mine, where the salary is so shit is not even enough to live properly. And worse of all the prices keep going up but the shit salary keeps staying the same. Its like a shithole. Thus I dont work. Of course had I the chance to work in America I wouldnt waste it. And would be living with a lot of money in my pockets.

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 16 23:13:48 2009 No.3919045 >>3918856 stupid post. doesn't know jack shit about buying a house and mortgages.

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 16 23:14:48 2009 No.3919048 Not your blog Reported

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 16 23:17:48 2009 No.3919076 File: 28 KB, 400x400, westaboos.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>3918967

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 16 23:22:48 2009 No.3919124 >>3918967 Not enough money to eat but enough for the internet? yeah riiiiight.

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 16 23:25:48 2009 No.3919145 >>3919124 I said I dont work. Which part of that you didnt understand?

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 16 23:26:48 2009 No.3919159 >>3918856 Call me a fag if you want, but the back of that chair looks like a penis.

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 16 23:27:48 2009 No.3919163 >>3919145 The part that you complain about not being able to live properly yet spending cash on internet instead of the necessary.

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 16 23:28:48 2009 No.3919175 >>3919159 no, no, you're right. It DOES look like a penis. At least, it's big like mine.

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 16 23:39:48 2009 No.3919260 Whats with the totem pole next to the ashtray?

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 16 23:54:48 2009 No.3919334 >>3919260 I was wondering this too. It looks like some kind of column straight from one of Lovecraft's novel.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 00:12:48 2009 No.3919431

I like the plan trust me i once considered doing that as well...Unfortunately i have learned that it is impossible to live as you describe espically they way finical status of the world is in. Secondly you will not make enough money at a single job to pay for a mortgage. I doubt you will get 6-8 people to move in with you and even if you do it will be difficult to keep all those personality and agendas living peacefully together...trust me i know from personal experience.
Also having many people in a small area (2-3 people in a bedroom) can be difficult. Also buying a house is extremely expensive. The cheapest houses here in the States are Cape house with only one bedroom, one bath small kitchen/livingroom for $120,000 USD add good home owners insurance for $500 a month plus $100 electricity bill, and if you are in the nothern part of the country where it is colder you need another $100 for heat, money for food. patience to deal with sometimes unruly tenants. And health Care depending again where you live that may or may not be a huge factor(Here in the U.S. it's huge). It's a wonderful dream to have, i once had a similar dream but once i started looking into i learned from living in a College dorm that it is near impossible to be able to do what you describe for a long period of time. And yes i would love to be doing other things besides slaving myself to a 50 hour work week, but then i woke up and relazed that this is impossible, even with a college degree finding a job that pays well is a challenge in and of itself. Personally if you are debt free keep it that way. and work and put as much money you can into a Roth IRA, CD(Certified Deposits). so that if you are lucky you can retire comfortably and not relay solely on the government for your retirement. Here is what i would suggest either start your own business doing something you love, or become a landlord after you have saved some money and done your homework on being a landlord.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 00:24:48 2009 No.3919503

>>3919431
In rural areas, like where I am now, homes go for around $70,000 at the very cheapest (but those are old and shitty). You could probably buy a decent fixer-upper for $90k and let it for two people per bedroom at best.

Forget sleeping bags. The people who are that desperate won't have enough money for you to turn any profit. And you have to make a profit greater than what you're putting into mortgage/utilities/maintenance, or you'll be the one on the street looking for a cheap sleeping bag before too long. Needless to say, there will be plenty of ass-busting on your part to pull this off.

Not a good investment at all imo, but I'm no venture capitalist.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 00:25:48 2009 No.3919505

>>3919431
God damn that's cheap. You know how much a house costs up here in NY? A shitty one room condo cost around 200,000 with 4 thousand property tax every year.

>>3918856
Get a full time job, buy a condo, and pay off your mortgage. Then your plan would work if you open up TONS of ad sites or start doing nonrisky daytrades. You could make around $150 a day even if you're bad at it if you have around 10,000 in capital to invest.

Anonymous ‮～ᚻᛟᛟᛟᛟᚩᛗ ‪‪‪‬ ‪‬ ‭‬ !Jones4ZrPA Thu Dec 17 00:28:48 2009 No.3919520

>>3919505
I would assume this guy isn't stupid enough to try something like this in or near a metropolis where cost of living is so much higher.

Maybe that's a bad assumption, considering the half-baked plan he's hatched, but yeah.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 00:33:48 2009 No.3919538

>>3919520
Well, the key difference in what I suggested and what he's proposing is that I'm telling him to pay off all of his major debt and have some cash in the bank to do it.

And besides rent and utilities it's not that expensive living in NYC. Especially if you know how to cook and know where to buy (Chinese supermarkets. The Koreans will rip you off and fruit in American places are expensive as fuck.)

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 00:39:48 2009 No.3919567

>>3919431
ROTH IRA's? Are you insane? I'm assuming OP is still in his 20's but with an his plan of NO JOB except Part time he's going to need every spare penny of what he's got and getting an IRA is a bad idea since if he ever needs to withdraw before he's 60 he's going to get double taxed. It's not worth it for this guy.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 00:45:48 2009 No.3919585

>>3918858
You don't need to report any income if you earn less than $10,000. But it would be best to work in a job that pays little because then you can get tax refunds to benefit low income indivduals AND homeowners.

And always go with CD's and Checking account. Currently banks up here in NY are only giving a .25% interest on there CD's and even less on their savings account.

Also, it would be a good idea to get a credit card that gives you cash back for use.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 00:49:48 2009 No.3919601 DAYTRADE. As long as your not completely shitty at it and have at least 10 grand you can at least pay of any weekly expenses you might have.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 00:56:48 2009 No.3919627 >>3919601 I'm a NEET that gets money from the government and have about 30k in the bank. I may be interested in this.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 01:02:48 2009 No.3919655 >>3919601 Daytrading does not guarantee consistent income. This should only be done just to make extra money.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 01:02:48 2009 No.3919660 >>3919601 Daytrade Enjoy losing your shirt, kid.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 01:07:48 2009 No.3919682

>>3919655
It's inconsistent but you can make money even when the market's falling if you buy at the right time of day and sell at the right time. And if you don't mind sitting in front of a computer for an hour or two waiting for your opportunity to sell. Or you can just set a limit price and hope that Micro and Macro economic news doesn't damage your stock.

And you should use a discount broker like Scottrade or Firstrade or something, and turn off mail b/c that shit costs money.

Of course there's risks but it's a better plan than buying a big ass house and renting it out to people.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 01:10:48 2009 No.3919700 >>3919660 You have to be a idiot to lose money daytrading stocks. You can only lose as much money as you put in and even then, unless you buy a bubble stock, or just a flat out terrible company, most companies come back up.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 01:30:48 2009 No.3919774 >>3919700 Well, too lose a significant amount of money anyway. Unless you try to short a stock or go Forex.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 01:31:48 2009 No.3919778 >>3919627 How are you getting your government money?

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 03:07:48 2009 No.3920074 File: 378 KB, 704x400, vlcsnap-1713687.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Just live in a condo or apartment OP.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 03:24:48 2009 No.3920103
File: 87 KB, 181x220, Imenjoyinglife.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>3918856

You should go become a mercenary like I plan to as a last resort. Sure the work is hard, but I guarantee you'll never go hungry. Plus if you die your death will come off a lot more respectful and manlier than just offing yourself one day.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 03:36:48 2009 No.3920156 I wonder if I can persist comfortably only on part time work. I'd be fine to live in a very very small room. I could do my important internet and computer work outside, with the free hotspots.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 03:46:48 2009 No.3920225

One word. Forex. Get the book Trading for a Living by Dr. Alexander Elder. It'll teach you how to trade without letting emotion get in the way.

I've developed a system for myself where I make around $45K a year profit right now trading just a couple of dozen hours a week, hopefully I can tweak a few things and increase my margins some more.

I'm also going to school full-time studying materials engineering and molecular biology. I'm looking for areas to start-up a tech company in this field, not necessarily because I want to get rich or work myself to death, but because I enjoy the subject matter. I'd be bored just sitting on 4chan 24/7.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 03:57:48 2009 No.3920274 >>3920225 One word. Foreskin.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 04:03:48 2009 No.3920314

>Eventually, my tenants will pay off my mortage
This is impossible, rental income is ALWAYS lower than risk free interest rate, regardless of how many people you rent to. This is because housing prices always go up in the long run (since, as the saying goes, they're not making any more lands). Because real estates are likely to appreciate in price, people will always invest into real state of rent is equal to risk free rate, since then any appreciation in price is all yous to keep.

But that's just the thing, if rent can eventually pay off interest and mortage, no one will rent, everyone will want to buy houses, rent out and keep the house X years down the track. So this is an impossibility. The very fact that people rent means it's cheaper to rent to pay the interest on the same house.

>>	Arcueid Brunestud !ARCIkc4cG6 Thu Dec 17 04:08:48 2009 No.3920338 >>3920274 Most mature, intelligent board on 4chan/ You betcha!

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 04:10:48 2009 No.3920345 >>3920338 There's actually a trade in foreskin I believe. It's used for extracting stem cells.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 04:11:48 2009 No.3920350 1) Get a good job. 2) Invest every penny you can. 3) Retire in less than 10 years.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 04:15:48 2009 No.3920375

do some research before getting involved with daytrading. gather data to see which indicators are worthless and which ones might be useful.

I don't know, something about the whole concept seems fishy to me. if it were that easy to make money, everybody would be doing it, thus killing the chances of anybody making a profit.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 04:18:48 2009 No.3920383

>>3920314
Wrong, when you agree to a mortgage with your bank, the mortgage premium stays the same unless you have a non-fixed rate mortgage which is stupid (but doesn't need as large of a down-payment), or you refinance/remortgage your house to take out an equity loan. Once you have your house paid off, or if the equity available on your house is enough to pay off the remainder of your mortgage, you can get a reverse-mortgage where you sell your house back to the bank and they send you a monthly check. This is how a lot people help subsidize their retirement.

The value of your house goes up as the local/regional property values go up, and you can use that as leverage to get an equity loan.

The reason not everyone is able to buy a house and get a mortgage is because you need to come up with the down-payment. Typically between 10% and 20%. For a lot of people on lower incomes, it's hard to save up the $25,000-$80,000+ in cash needed. You also need to have a good credit rating, and people with fucked up credit scores have a more difficult time getting a mortgage.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 04:26:48 2009 No.3920418 >>3920383 Also, it can cost another $5000-$10000 in lawyer/notary fees and taxes during the transaction of purchasing a house, which you also need to have on hand in cash.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 04:41:48 2009 No.3920497 >>3920418 It's worth it if your house has enough equity gained.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 04:49:48 2009 No.3920523

>Once you have your house paid off
That's my point, to pay it off you will actually have to pay bank more money than what you're getting in rent.

If you pay only your rent to the bank, it won't even cover your interest, your principle will just keep on growing. Not that any bank is stupid enough to let you do that though.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 05:05:48 2009 No.3920616 >>3918856 OP can open up your house has a guest house is definitely easier than finding people to share the house with.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 05:09:48 2009 No.3920624

>>3920523
I don't know where you live, but where I live, your monthly mortgage premium, that is your minimum monthly payment, is structured to cover a portion of the interest. So the banks end up making a bit of money, but if you pay your premium you can still have the mortgage paid off in 15-25 years depending on the type of mortgage you get.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 05:25:48 2009 No.3920712

>>3920624
That's not my point, my point is that that house you got with the mortgage will not be cover the payment with the rent income it generates, not even if it's one of those fixed principal loan where you only pay interest.

Trust me I work in mortgages and deposits.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 05:29:48 2009 No.3920740 /jp/ (Morgan) - Finance/General

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 07:00:48 2009 No.3921186 The existence of the Monetary system and Work is the sign of an immature society. If you're going to say "fuck you" to society you might as well help promote the cause for a Resource based economy, OP.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 07:04:48 2009 No.3921203 >>3920740 You forgot the Chase.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 07:13:48 2009 No.3921227 >>3920712 Please explain how a thousand or so from renting doesn't cover the mortgage for a cheap house ?

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 07:36:48 2009 No.3921291

>>3920314
wrong, most company rather rent their equipment than buying it. the same logic apply to house renting. Because, if you rent a house, you can change where you live indefinitely easy, also, you don't have to deal with the condition of the house. If the house is getting lousy or broken, just call the landlord and have it fix. If its unfixable, just change another one. Thus, the rent is always higher than the interest of the loan to cover these extra risk.

learn to finance 101

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 08:02:48 2009 No.3921378

>>3921291
No companies rent because it increases tax savings. Interest on debt is deducted from revenue BEFORE tax, where as return on equity is taxed normally.

Individuals can do this as well with 'negativer gearing', but negative gearing relies on the value of the real estate to increase in order to leverage and make a big return. Waiting for values of real estate to go up is not risk free, it doesn't always happen. And if you are leveraged you lose more.

>>3921227
Cheap house -> cheap rent
The more you sublet, the lower the individual rent. Not to mention it cause more wear on the house and decreases it's market value. There will be a local maximum on return vs sublet, but even at the local maximum you won't earn enough rent to cover even the interest.

Don't believe me, go try it. You either end up losing money, or the banks will never lend you that money.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 08:06:48 2009 No.3921393

>>3921186
You and the rest of the closet communist have to learn that nothing comes from nothing. Nobody gonna support you, in many cases not even your own family. So in the end you advocate a system where you wish to become slave of dependency where some authoritartian regime decides what you may do and what not. No way. Sure capistalist system are not very efficient for the whole but at least you have the freedom do to what you want to do with the property of yours unlike you now socialist orders.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 08:11:48 2009 No.3921417

>>3921393
>Sure capistalist system are not very efficient

Capitalist societies are the most efficient. That is why they produce all the new technology, have the highest standards of living, and the longest life expectancies. They don't necessarily have the same equality socialism has, nor even equal opportunity often. But money and competition are the best motivators for people to be effective and efficient.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 08:12:48 2009 No.3921423

>implying some internet bum can generate income by daytrading

Don't listen to internet fags, such things do not exist. Even experts analists (not some corporate or media trolls) achieve a success quota like 60% and now someone comes in here and tells us he's making a living off daytrading. Cool story bro. And remember, without lots of disposible money to begin your trading odyseey, you won't gain anything

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 08:13:48 2009 No.3921429 >>3918856 This picture makes me want to draw, but I know I'm no good at it.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 08:14:48 2009 No.3921430 Fucking losers without any ambitions or goals in life. This is why you guys remain useless NEETs who only leech off society. Enjoy your worthless lives, I'm not even sure why were you guys born into this world in the first place.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 08:14:48 2009 No.3921431 >>3921417 I was talking about efficiency in distribution. Today we have overcapacity in many sectors while the numbers of people who can't afford these things are growing.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 08:14:48 2009 No.3921437 >>3921186 Funny how resource bartering based societies evolved into ones that used precious metals monetary systems, then paper, and now virtual credit.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 08:14:48 2009 No.3921438 >>3921423 Yeah pretty much. I've seen some data mining the ASX did, the people who trade the most frequently are on average those that earn the lowest returns.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 08:17:48 2009 No.3921453

>while the numbers of people who can't afford these things are growing

No, that's exactly an example of why market is efficient. The market is not there to ensure everyone get everything. It's there to ensure those with the strongest will (urgency of need) and greatest capacity to pay (thereby encouraging production) will get the goods.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 08:17:48 2009 No.3921454

>>3921431
Capitalism is still far more efficient than any other system. The problem is not with capitalism, the problem is with implementation of capitalism, as well as real life difficulties. The situation was far worse in shitty 2nd world (read former USSR) countries, and 3rd world countries.

Lambda !DELTATiWVA Thu Dec 17 08:19:48 2009 No.3921461

>>3918856
Economy might screw you somehow for a period of time. (I can't see our society and its relation to our money system last for the next 40 years, first of all it's shit)
And I wouldn't want to live with other people.
But I don't want to work either for the same reasons and I pretty much have no plan at all, so I shouldn't be criticizing your plan.

I'm hoping for my government to do something, hurr.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 08:19:48 2009 No.3921462 >>3921453 As long as you don't have people in power who can manipulate the economy and gain an unfair advantage, like pharma.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 08:20:48 2009 No.3921470 Maximizing your time is called finding a job you love.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 08:24:48 2009 No.3921481

>>3921462
The thing is, left to it's own capitalism will destroy itself with it's constant thrust towards more efficiency. That's the main reason why we have governments - to correct market failures such as public goods and externalities and monopolies.

To have market failure is not the fault of capitalism, because the very force that powers a capitalist economy is what also creates the potential for market failure. It's the fault of the government if market failures are not corrected.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 08:28:48 2009 No.3921489

>>3921453
I hope you understand what ballony you are posting. Strongest will? What the fuck. Sure is neoliberal propaganda. Take a look on the world without these social-darwinist glasses of yours.

These things happen primarly because the current cycle of the system reaches it's peak slowly, meaning accumulation of power by very few entities that set the rules and corrupt the legislative to their benefits.
What neoliberals don't understand: Their prosperity is linked to the wealth of the public, if nobody can afford their silly overhyped and overpriced products, they are gonna lose everything in the long run.
It's a downward spiral of price dumping by exploiting the poorest to provide generally affordable prices for the public while the wealth of the majority of the public is decreasing by doing so.
Look at the debt ratios of the private, public and government sectors, because you can't be pumping this bubble forever you know.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 08:33:48 2009 No.3921501

>>3921481
Capitalist systems = rule of those with the most power

Meaning there is only one capistalist system, the one we are seeing right now. Capitalist won't it to be that way, governments are only pawns in the game. Laws are written by corporate interests, not the other way around.

If you want your government 'working right' you would have to wish for totalitarian regimes that have to oppress banking and industrial sectors.

But that doesn't mean that I advocate socialist systems.

Lambda !DELTATiWVA Thu Dec 17 08:33:48 2009 No.3921503

>>3921481
>more efficiency
An important thing to note here is that only production efficiency is increased for certain products, because you'd loose sales due to the market demands being met with more durable or efficient products.
(Think of magnetic razor sharpeners for example: increases durability by 2-4 => companies don't want it)

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 08:38:48 2009 No.3921523 Remember that you might die very young if you dont eat somewhat decent food/visit the doctor when you're sick/etc, I'd almost recommend you to move in some scandinavian country so you wouldnt die even if you run out of money.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 08:38:48 2009 No.3921524

>>3921503
Maximizing profits obviously means to create inferior products, which are divided in production lines for the public and overpriced luxury products as better equipment. Completely different than what austrians believe. This works best with a good market positions. The big ones drive out the smaller ones by cheaper prices however the prices have a reason ...

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 08:38:48 2009 No.3921528

>>3921489
>neoliberal

I think you mean neoconservative there kiddo.

>>3921501
You're an idiot. Capitalism does not inherently mean that people with power rule. Its a fact of the world, that no matter what economic or governmental system you have, PEOPLE WITH POWER WILL RULE.

>>3921503
You should read up on King Gillete since you bring up razors. If they actually had to compete with someone besides themselves, they wouldn't be able to make those decisions. The market would, if properly informed, and not complete idiots like Americans, end up picking the best option for the market as a whole.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 08:40:48 2009 No.3921532

you think you will be able to have all these brokeasses living in your place for the next 20+ years? You think you will be able to pay for the repairs and wear and tear. what you are talking about is simpy a crackhouse

fuck, just build an air conditioned shed in the south tx desert or something.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 08:40:48 2009 No.3921534 >>3921524 Maximizing profits means creating products that the people believe have the necessary quality. You don't make profits by selling something people don't want. Your argument is bull.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 08:41:48 2009 No.3921539 >>3921528 Neo-liberal. Only in the USA does the name get conflated.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 08:42:48 2009 No.3921546

>>3921524
Not everyone can afford the best. This is a fact. In an ideal market, the product would probably have the best utility to price ratio.

What you are seeing is the abuse of power to manipulate the market and create an unfair market without proper competition. Capitalism doesn't have to be this way.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 08:43:48 2009 No.3921547

>>3921523
Yeah if cou manage to get an appointment in time. Waiting lists are very long in socialist health programs especially if you have a wild running pharma cartell that aims to control and profit from food production ... creating sicker people = bigger profits. Health systems implode = rationality programs are invented where you won't get your treatment if you fall into certain categories or you will be send home with cheaper solutions that won't help you to solve your problems but lessen the effects for some time

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 08:44:48 2009 No.3921550 In general, most of the things people blame on capitalism should be blamed on government meddling in the economy. Hardly any of the so called market failures cannot be retraced to public policy.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 08:45:48 2009 No.3921552

>>3921532

Actually I know a guy who built his own house out in a big plot of Arizona desert he bought cheap.
Took him a while but it's finished and he has electricity and running water, all the works.
Don't know how much it cost him though.
But knowing Anon, I'm sure he'll find a way to build a pretty cheap twig house.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 08:46:48 2009 No.3921553

>>3921546
But is because that's capitalism. Anyway, I'm hearing the same stuff from closest communist who still beleive in their social revolution crap, always telling the socialist regimes weren't real because mankind wasn't wise enough blah blah blah
Do you know how many socialist there are in Europe who understand the negative points about capitalism but would love to get rid of it completely and install real socialism? Unbelievable high, it's like 2/3 of the politically interested crowd, more so with the younger generations.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 08:46:48 2009 No.3921554

>>3921534
Well you can if people have to buy to try. Or if you dominate the market enough that they know no other.

Take Gillete razors. You can't tell how good they are without buying them. (You could hear by word of mouth, or by advertisement, but a true assessment is difficult to come by) Likewise, with disposable razors on the market, people have never had a straight shave, or even a DE shave. People live with the irritation, the ingrown hairs, and the nicks, because they know no better.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 08:47:48 2009 No.3921555

>>3921528
Tragedy of the commons. The market will not pick the best option for the market as a whole. Each player in the market will attempt to pick the best option to maximize his or her own profit, which will ultimately cause the whole thing to implode.

Human nature is the fundamental flaw with pure capitalism.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 08:47:48 2009 No.3921557 >>3921553 Its pretty obvious you've never studied economics in depth.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 08:50:48 2009 No.3921564 >>3921557 It is obvious that you have not studied the world in depth.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 08:51:48 2009 No.3921572 >>3921555 Tragedy of the commons has to do with externalities. Thats something for the government to fix. The market won't implode because people are getting maximum utility, and businesses will only run at a profit.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 08:52:48 2009 No.3921573

>>3921555
That's true, same with other political system. That's why the western elites would love to lower the global population by up to 95%. Because smaller population = better control = relative more wealth for the indivual
However to sustain the new system of the new world order, the system must be the most controlled in human societies, where even birth and death is controlled and dealt with by the authorities

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 08:52:48 2009 No.3921578 >>3921564 Your comments show anything but depth. They show at best, shallow superficial observations, without properly identifying the cause.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 08:54:48 2009 No.3921583 >>3921573 No, elites love more people. Because if they don't have more people, some other elite is going to have more people.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 08:56:48 2009 No.3921591

>>3921555
Wait what? Tragedy of the commons has to do with communal property, not capitalism. If it was capitalism, the landlord would be charging each and every farmer for grazing on the plot of land. This would cause farmers to factor in that cost and consider how many cows to raise, and send out to graze. The land lord would adjust the prices accordingly to maximize his profit.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 09:00:48 2009 No.3921601

>>3921557
But aren't they teaching close-minded market ideologies like the neo-liberal stuff. Have fun 'competing' with mass almost-slave labor from the east. Dunno who's gonna buy their products to sustain the existing overcapacities in like 20 years .... and even if you rationalize them, many jobs will cease to exist and result in less products sold.

What's then? Some neat little fascist cycle to get rid of the useleess eaters who are causing the economies to suck?

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 09:01:48 2009 No.3921607 >>3921583 But they don't need many people with the modern technology. Not for production, not for science and not military purposes.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 09:02:48 2009 No.3921613 >>3921578 Enlighten us goyim anonymous.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 09:06:48 2009 No.3921624

>>3921601
Not here, they teach the theory, and then how it applies to the real world, and what the causes for the current situation is. Its up to you, and your other motivations and ideologies to determine what kind of policy you embrace. Economics is theory behind human behavior, they don't tell you what to do with it. In fact, most professors in 4-year unis will have many disagreements with the current system.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 09:07:48 2009 No.3921631 >>3921607 Not true, modern technology can mean increases in efficiency. Its also a great motivator, as people will need to work and develop new technologies, to earn money, to but said new technologies. Elites just skim profit off the top.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 09:19:48 2009 No.3921671

>>3921631
You don't need billions of people. A small social caste of elite scientist educated in elite universities and working in elite institutions will suffice. Most work is being done by them financed by the military-industrial complex or public funds. You know like MIT, they don't just exist out of nothing. It's planned that way.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 09:22:48 2009 No.3921679 >>3921624 From what I read they are giving up on teaching the system as whole because not importand anymore in times of globalization but focus more on private business economics and neoliberal stuff.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 09:27:48 2009 No.3921699 >>3921601 >and even if you rationalize them, many jobs will cease to exist No qualms there >result in less products sold. he_still_thinks_only_human_capital_is_relevant_in_producing a_good_or_service.jpg

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 09:28:48 2009 No.3921701

You know how everybody makes fun of Glenn Beck?

I took his advice and invested in gold stocks before the crash. I've already made $600,000 in 3 years and dropped out of college by selling part of it for housing/food, the rest is still in there since gold is still going up.

So yeah, daytrading works. If it didn't I would be working rather than screwing around on /jp/ right now.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 09:30:48 2009 No.3921712

>>3921679
There are advanced courses on specific ideologies, but you still need to understand your fundamental economic concepts, at least in college. I go to an American "liberal" school, meaning its socialist biased, so those are the kinds of things they teach, if you choose to do additional courses on in depth study. I'd imagine "conservative" schools would have courses on what you call "neoliberal" policy. These courses are not mandatory at all. (It is quite ironic for a capitalist system to not educate the population on economics though)

Theres also applied business economics, micro, macro etc. Like it or not, the US has most of the best and diverse Universities teaching higher education in the world.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 09:31:48 2009 No.3921718 >>3921701 Its called a bubble. They are not particularly easy to anticipate or see, and you will be screwed when it pops.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 09:31:48 2009 No.3921719

>>3921701
But you have to know that Becky is being paid big corporate money. He's one of the persons to impersonate fags like Alex Jones to keep them sheeples in the system. Same with fags from the corporate left. Control the opposition and limit the influence of the extremes and profit as long as possible.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 09:34:48 2009 No.3921727

>>3921671
You don't need billions of people because of two reasons.

Economies of scale (at the point where going larger results in less profits)

Limited resources

Otherwise you go as big as you can go. More people means more taxes and revenue, due to a bigger economy. While there is a point where it is detrimental (and which we have likely passed) you still want the largest population you can sustain and manage.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 09:35:48 2009 No.3921733

>>3921712
And your point of view is like what? Nothing wrong? Economies are in top shape?

>>3921699
Sorry?

Btw you should keep an eye on the green movement, it will destroy the economies of the west just as planned. Post-Indudstrial era and stuff, the elites don't need you anymore, so no more reason for the current capitalist systems.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 09:37:48 2009 No.3921738 >>3921701 I've already made $600,000 in 3 years Not everyone just happens to have 100k+ sitting around.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 09:39:48 2009 No.3921744 >>3921733 Well since I never said anything to imply that, nor did I explicitly state it, I guess you're a troll. No more responses after this for you.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 09:40:48 2009 No.3921751 >>3921733 >i have no idea what i am talking about but i listen to pop econ, what uncle gorbaldawich says about the economy, and watch zeitgeist every day

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 09:41:48 2009 No.3921756

>>3921719
My point was that daytrading works, not an endorsement of Glenn Beck.

He clearly sold out to the gold investors, since they take up 90% of his commercials, and made a killing off of it, which at the very least shows that he's not as dumb as liberals want you to think he is. This whole "Beck raped and killed a girl in 1990" is some of the stupidest shit I've heard in a while. At least come up with an original joke instead of ripping off Saget's roast.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 09:42:48 2009 No.3921761

>>3921727
Read Brave New World and watch THX1183. They call themselves philantrophist and they hate commoners. Obviously if they plan to lessen the population by this scale they won't be continuing like before. From what one get read they prefer socialism, this will be neo-socialism ruled by scientific methods. You work for a greater good like achieving Utopia in a highly controlled society from birth to death, genetic manipulations included.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 09:42:48 2009 No.3921762

>>3921718 implying gold has ever crashed in value in the private market for more than a month or two

>>3921733

And that movement will fail or become a Brave New World-like style of living due to physical capital never being replenished. Add that to the huge decrease in human capital that you suspect will occur if such a movement gains power and you'll see a resurgence of "ok, we'll implement free market trading but try and call it something else" that the USSR and PRC did back in their Socialist heyday.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 09:43:48 2009 No.3921766 >>3921738 >$15 -> $80 is not 3 times, it's more than 5 times as much.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 09:43:48 2009 No.3921772

>>3921756
Well of course day trading works to some extent. You're for one, riding off of economic growth due to your investment. Just like interest off a bank account. The question is how effective is it in reality for the average Joe. Buying lotto tickets is great for winners, but its not exactly a great way to make money.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 09:45:48 2009 No.3921780 >>3921751 Cool story bro >>3921744 You implied the neoliberal agenda isn't the pre-dominant in modern economics.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 09:45:48 2009 No.3921781 >>3921762 Alright, the bubble does not have to pop or crash, but it will decline.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 09:48:48 2009 No.3921790 >>3921761 I've read Brave New World, and your point between socialism and elites and such, or rather, the connection is vague, and I'd rather not misinterpret it. Please elaborate.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 09:48:48 2009 No.3921791 >>3921781 Bubbles never decline. And the fags here celebrating denial on all fronts will see with their own eyes how the global economic system collapses in the next 10 to 20 years, and then the global socialist will take over.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 09:49:48 2009 No.3921800

>>3921772
It is if you're not as dumb as the average Joe.

Millionaires/Billionaires become rich mostly through investments rather than their actual salaries or "bonuses" (which are just a blatant way of cheating taxes through a technicality).

You just have to know how to get out before everything goes to shit. Actually, now that they got rid of the uptick rule, you can just switch to short selling as everything goes to shit since the stock doesn't require an uptick before you can short sell anymore. Thanks SEC.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 09:49:48 2009 No.3921801 >>3921791 >troll harder

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 09:52:48 2009 No.3921819 >>3921800 You've got to have luck too.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 09:53:48 2009 No.3921822 >>3921791 And then after he socialists take over, everyone will be miserable, the socialist order will fall apart, and give way to capitalism.

>>	Lambda !DELTATiWVA Thu Dec 17 09:57:48 2009 No.3921841 >>3921822 Or they'll just keep capitalism but tax money transfers and introduce unconditional basic income.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 09:59:48 2009 No.3921847 >>3921841 Which is more capitalist than socialist. Its just capitalism with socialism patching up a few holes.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 10:03:48 2009 No.3921867

>>3921790
Keeping it short: Global elites like the banking dynasites, the nobility and aristocracy of Europe especially from the former British Empire, big corporations in energy, food, technology, industry and military who wouldn't exist without the bankers permission and the elite circles of politics and science always dreamed about their Utopia.
They won't to get rid of the current social and political order and implement a socialist authoritarian regime with highly controlled societies because they believe they can guide mankind into something better.
With modern technology this could be possible, at least to setup such a system. They created the UN and sister organizations to advocate these policies and they are behind the EU.
First step is to get rid of nation state and create bigger Unions for easier control, obviously this will overrule the democracies as we know them today.
Then they need something to get the public to accept the new paradigm. Either by letting the Unions fight each other by proxy wars like in 1984 or to give up their liberties for a greater good. In former times they used religion, but this won't do it now so they invented the environmental cult accompied by esoteric teachings (doesn't mean you are bad for being interested in these things, just that they support it).

This will be the rational for the post-industrial era and the economy fags here should understand what it means to tear big parts of the industry apart like witht he plans to reduce up to 95% prc of carbon emission uo to 2150 ....

Terrorism was a weaker example for the first to setup the police state grids, now the greeny come into place. Most of them are funded by big corporate money, look up the NGOs and see for yourself. Then the population control policies come into place like one child policies, child licenses and so on. Rationalizing medicine and health comes next, same with energy, food and water.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 10:07:48 2009 No.3921883 >>3921819 You've got to have luck too. How's that any different than now? >>3921847 And the vicious cycle will continue again as the government takes on more and more obligations than it is needed to concern itself with.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 10:07:48 2009 No.3921884 >>3921867 That tinfoil hat looks spiffingly good on you today, good sir.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 10:13:48 2009 No.3921913 >>3921867 >>3921867 Who care about this. The only thing that matter is how do I profit out of this and keep my internet as a retired millionaire?

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 10:15:48 2009 No.3921922

>>3921867
>Keeping it short: Global elites like the banking dynasites, the nobility and aristocracy of Europe especially from the former British Empire, big corporations in energy, food, technology, industry and military who wouldn't exist without the bankers permission and the elite circles of politics and science always dreamed about their Utopia.

I won't fight you too much on this. I don't particularly agree, but I don't think its too much of a stretch either. My one contention would be Utopia. Politicians with a philanthropic drive tend to be not as ambitious, powerful, or plentiful as selfish power mongerers. Scientists also are not always Utopia seekers. As someone said before, science is largely funded by military. It might be argued that military is needed for Utopia, its not exactly a fun rainbows and unicorns job for the people actually working on weapons.

>They won't to get rid of the current social and political order and implement a socialist authoritarian regime with highly controlled societies because they believe they can guide mankind into something better.

Soviets? I don't really believe the elite are all that into the Utopia idea. I could be wrong, but since you are asserting it, I would like to see some supporting evidence, besides donations and some philanthropy. There would also have to be a general consensus among elites what better is.

>>	Lambda !DELTATiWVA Thu Dec 17 10:16:48 2009 No.3921925 >>3921847 True indeed >>3921701 What day trading services do you use and recommend?

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 10:17:48 2009 No.3921932

>>3921867

Honestly, I don't think these "elites" have the manpower anymore to force more than the people that reside in the same country as them to follow their will, if that. I'm hoping that, with the US at least, when the international reserve currency changes from the US Dollar, the US starts to fracture into smaller nations. While freedoms in larger urban areas will probably restricted "for the greater good", smaller rural areas will be able to escape this due to there not being much of an advantage to greatly split up the police force in trying to force urban and rural areas to follow the will of this in power (makes them too weak on both fronts, better to just control one area).

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 10:25:48 2009 No.3921957

>With modern technology this could be possible, at least to setup such a system. They created the UN and sister organizations to advocate these policies and they are behind the EU.

The UN was created to manage international politics, and prevent the Facist threat. It is mostly a formalized forum where powers can discuss and assert their nuclear weapons power. As far as I know, the EU was established for economic reasons.

>First step is to get rid of nation state and create bigger Unions for easier control, obviously this will overrule the democracies as we know them today.

This is a big step. People in power don't give up power. People in power would have to gain more power from being in a large Union, and that is not guaranteed. Democracies also ideally have power in the people, and people can also revolt. Not that its impossible to have a "Big Brother" but its not one little step.

>Then they need something to get the public to accept the new paradigm. Either by letting the Unions fight each other by proxy wars like in 1984 or to give up their liberties for a greater good.

Is it that important for people in power to cement power by going to war? Are there not other ways of securing a place in the world, such as economic reliance. People do have to give up liberties for the common good. Its called law.

>In former times they used religion, but this won't do it now so they invented the environmental cult accompied by esoteric teachings (doesn't mean you are bad for being interested in these things, just that they support it).

I think this is a bit of a stretch. While there is one loony branch of environmentalism, a lot of it has to deal with externalities, which is important.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 10:27:48 2009 No.3921966 >>3921883 Well do you acknowledge its a gamble, and do you acknowledge you don't know the success rates with a good deal of precision?

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 10:31:48 2009 No.3921983

>This will be the rational for the post-industrial era and the economy fags here should understand what it means to tear big parts of the industry apart like witht he plans to reduce up to 95% prc of carbon emission uo to 2150 ....

Technology changes. The truth is, we don't actually NEED half the stuff we have that produces emissions. They are luxuries, and can be taxed to hell.

>Terrorism was a weaker example for the first to setup the police state grids, now the greeny come into place.

Terrorism and environmentalism are not the same. Going to have to plain out disagree there.

>Most of them are funded by big corporate money, look up the NGOs and see for yourself.

They have to cater to the demands of the consumer if they want to survive.

>Then the population control policies come into place like one child policies, child licenses and so on.

Not the worst thing in the world. It could also just be solved with taxes.

>Rationalizing medicine and health comes next, same with energy, food and water.

This already done. If you have money, you get these things.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 10:41:48 2009 No.3922014

>>3921867
I just noticed some mistakes because I was in a hurry, so let me apologize and correct myself

- War on Terrorism was used to secure geo-political imporant areas to force the 'rouge states' into compliance by making them dependent, i.e. by controlling the energy transport lines

- Before the new paradigm comes into place they have first to make sure to make the public dependent onto the current system like with wealth transfer systems as effect of the controlled economy by big corporations who profit from their connection to big banking and labor camps in the East. This will destroy the middle-class and shift society into two class system, the higher class and the working class, the middle class will become insignificant, lower paid and more importantly dependent on government funds.

Then the greeny agenda play out and will be hammered into your skull by the controlled mass media infrastructures: TV Series, Movies, Documentation, Print Media, Internet News Portals, NGOs, politicans, corporations and so on.
For the one who gonna resist the police state grid had been installed. In these times you have to expect the growing of the total surveillance grid brought to you by the NSA, Microsoft, Sun, Cisco, Google, Apple, Siemens, MIT and the list goes on.

The majority of the public will embrace the new Gaia Church of Climate Change and go along the plans to decrease of carbon emissions of 95% up to 2050 (sorry for the mistake before) because most of them won't understand the effects of these policies.

Revolts will be small and non organized because of the mind control of the media and the demonstrators will be fought down by special police units and para-militaries.

Then the rationalizing of public goods will start, social transfers to keep everbody from revolting but on the lowest level, eugenics and birth control laws, re-education is already starting in schools and universities.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 10:43:48 2009 No.3922023

>>3921867 Then the population control policies come into place like one child policies, child licenses and so on.

It's very easy to scream about the injustices of this when you live in a country with seemingly endless resources. Nevertheless, the earth does have a maximum carrying capacity. Assuming we have things like healthcare and food and safety standards that substantially increase longevity and push local carrying capacities upward, and assuming that simply letting the population max out and cause a massive worldwide disaster is undesirable, how do you propose that we keep the population at a sustainable level without breeding restrictions? This is not an ideological question, strictly a practical one.

>Rationalizing medicine and health comes next, same with energy, food and water.
Do you honestly believe that this is not happening right now?

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 10:47:48 2009 No.3922040

Anyway the future looks grim-dark but for us it shouldn't be as hard as for normalfags. For example, I was never on a plane and flight costs will rise pretty high in the next years.

Many people believe this is only happening because the fags in power of politics and economy are just plain stupid. But I can't accept this. And if you follow some of the writings of the chosen ones, you will see that they have been advocating eugenics, population reduction, drugging and poisong the public and the post-democratic era since a long time ago.
Just a coincidence?

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 10:52:48 2009 No.3922074

>>3922023
Of course, this is happening gradually as I said. First through the current system and then the one in between, a top-down controlled system of macro-factors but not yet controlling all factors of human life (like the EU which being transformed into such a system).

In the end the goods won't be rationalized solely on monetary factors but with a carbon credit system on top of it. The greenies really love that, saving mother earth and stuff hurr durr. How dare them owning two computers and a externalgraphic card and a radio and a television and a console.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 10:53:48 2009 No.3922080 Basement conspiracy theorist much? They don't need you in a totalitarian dystopia. They just need to secure a spot in this self perpetuating machine.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 10:54:48 2009 No.3922089 >>3922080 Could be so or not, but in the end the controlled society will become reality, won't it?

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 10:58:48 2009 No.3922101

>>3922074
So you're saying we should be free to cause externalities (commons tragedy)? Its not morally, ethically, or economically wrong to charge people for polluting.

There are health costs to pollution, which costs money to fix. There are climate costs which affect farming, and cost money to fix. It affects water quality and causes acid rain, which costs money to fix. The list goes on.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 10:59:48 2009 No.3922105

>>3922074 In the end the goods won't be rationalized solely on monetary factors but with a carbon credit system on top of it. The greenies really love that, saving mother earth and stuff hurr durr. How dare them owning two computers and a externalgraphic card and a radio and a television and a console.

Putting aside the nutty conspiracy aspect of that, in your scenario I really don't see how carbon credits are really any different than money. They're both abstract representations of value (ostensibly) based on the availability of a limited resource. Ultimately it doesn't change anything. Consumer prices will go up, lifestyles may change a bit, but when all is said and done it won't have any substantial effect on anything as far as I can tell. Other than short-term growing pains, what exactly is the problem with carbon credits?

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 10:59:48 2009 No.3922107 >>3922089 >the controlled society will become reality, won't it? We're already in a controlled society. Deal with it.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 11:00:48 2009 No.3922113 >>3922105 Hes just an anti-establishment zeitgeist kiddo.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 11:04:48 2009 No.3922140

>The UN was created to manage international politics, and prevent the Facist threat. It is mostly a formalized forum where powers can discuss and assert their nuclear weapons power. As far as I know, the EU was established for economic reasons.

UN = Prototype of a world governance system. Yet not powerful enough but as some elite were saying, just wait for the right crisis and the right moment and a new world order could become possible

EU = Not true. It was planned since the end of WW2 and advocated as a economic union at first, but it isn't any longer. The nation-states gave up their souvereignity because EU laws go before state laws. The EU is controlled by the commission who is appointed by the elite circles of Europe. The parlament does not have any rights other than make suggestions to the commission and that's why the parlament is the only organ with democratic legitimation. They are there for the show. Most of the politicans that are send to the parlament are second and third-rate and most of them don't even read the policy paper they are debating on in the parlament as many reports have shown in the media.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 11:06:48 2009 No.3922149 >>3922113 You understand that Zeitgeist is exactly what I'm talking about? Controlled oppositon. The guy behind Zeitgeist is advocating for a neo-socialist world order run by the elites and some LOL SUPERCOMPUTER entity as enforces entity...

Lambda !DELTATiWVA Thu Dec 17 11:08:48 2009 No.3922159

>>3922089
You are bored with the world and wish for it to be a place not controlled by casualfags.
Politicians aren't any smarter than 95% of the population.

Chances are that nothing will happen for a long time, because there's a lack of decisiveness in today's politics. Even though there's much wrong with the world that could be improved. Because most politicians are afraid of loosing their power.

At least that's what I see when I look at germany's politics. The politicians keep doing the same and wonder why they loose votes.

Actually, I don't know shit about politics.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 11:11:48 2009 No.3922170

>>3922140
Alright, you're crazy. The UN was a replacement for the League of Nations. It has absolutely 0 power besides what its members contribute. It is not a world government which holds any real power. It is a forum where nuclear powers have a decision making process besides launching a nuclear war.

Very few people are crazy enough to want a new world order. The few hat are generally aren't elites. Elites are comfortable where they are. Elites are almost always on the conservative side, and rarely on the revolutionary side.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 11:12:48 2009 No.3922180 >>3922149 You are now officially discredited.

health commertal Eragstoossy Thu Dec 17 11:17:48 2009 No.3922213

rashes caused by prescription drugs http://healthreporter.info/reglan/reglan-to-treat-migraines
[url=http://healthreporter.info/gaba/in-a-gaba-da-vida]shoplifting drugs[/url] drug screen programs [url=http://healthreporter.info/diabetic/affordability-of-diabetic-foods]affordability of diabetic foods[/url]
state law locating drug rehab facility pennsylvania http://healthreporter.info/quinapril/quinapril-image
[url=http://healthreporter.info/feldene/flavoxate-dosage]rashes caused by prescription drugs[/url] suboxone in urine drug testing [url=http://healthreporter.info/cytoxan/nccn-guidelines-for-cytoxan-for-systemic-lupus]nccn guidelines for cytoxan for systemic lupus[/url]
adreson drug http://healthreporter.info/zithromax/zithromax-tri-pack
[url=http://healthreporter.info/dicyclomine/is-dicyclomine-for-constipation]home test drug[/url] spasmodic dysphonia caused by drug use [url=http://healthreporter.info/finasteride/propecia-and-finasteride]propecia and finasteride[/url] illicet drugs [url=http://healthreporter.info/zovirax]zovirax[/url]
drugs contraindicated with myastenia gravis [url=http://healthreporter.info/desloratadine/didronel]didronel[/url] identify unknown drugs [url=http://healthreporter.info/fosamax/fosamax-joint-pain-side-effects]fosamax joint pain side effects[/url]
information drugs in sport [url=http://healthreporter.info/fda/food-safety-consultant-fda]food safety consultant fda[/url] drug usage in schools [url=http://healthreporter.info/fungus/fungus-polish]fungus polish[/url]
vacuum seal drugs [url=http://healthreporter.info/feldene/drug-feldene]drug feldene[/url] massachusets september 2007 drug busts [url=http://healthreporter.info/exelon/mrskos-exelon]mrskos exelon[/url]
http://healthreporter.info/zyban/quit-smoking-on-150-mg-of-zyban tri view medicine cabinets

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 11:18:48 2009 No.3922215

>>3922105
I see you are one of those NGO controlled liberals. the carbon scam is based on a highly controversial and yet unproofed theory of anthropogenic global warming, meaning that CO2 caused by humans is the main factor for global warming. Complete fiction as climate change is a natural event for our Planet and the climate system is so complex that nobody really understands it unlike the UN financed panels and research groups who run their silly computer models, but not to investigate this very important matter but to collect data and bend it into the perspective of human caused global warming.

And rationalizing isn't really what you said. Rationalizing means that there is enough for all and that you would be able to afford it but aren't allowed to by the authorities because they have to fulfil some soviet style quotas based on xy year plans off of fraudulent scientific estimations

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 11:22:48 2009 No.3922229

>>3922159
Yeah but this is exactly what NGOs and Institutions argue about. The post-democratic era means that democratic systems are not efficient enough to 'prepare the world for the upcoming changes of the 21st century' and that the world needs a global scientific authoritarian regime because they know so much better than the rest of us.

I'm not buying that. History shows that such regimes never worked out for the interests of the public.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 11:23:48 2009 No.3922231 Congratulations. You have earned troll rank [George W. Bush]

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 11:23:48 2009 No.3922234 >>3922180 What? Why is that? Or are you just some troll?

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 11:26:48 2009 No.3922244

>>3922229
Regimes usually work out better for the public than the public would be without them. They just tend to be unfair in the distribution of the benefit.

>>3922215
There are other side effects of pollution, even if you think global warming is not real, there are very real health effects, effects on water supplies, and effects on food supplies.

Seriously, do you conservatives ever come off not looking like idiots?

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 11:26:48 2009 No.3922246 /jp/ - Conspiracy/ROW ROW FIGHT DA POWAH

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 11:27:48 2009 No.3922250 >>3922234 >Zeigeist >Troll

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 11:28:48 2009 No.3922259

>Complete fiction as climate change is a natural event for our Planet and the climate system is so complex that nobody really understands it

>Climate change is complex so we don't understand how it works
>But it's natural! Definitely! Yeah!

Nice hypocritical sentence structure there.

Besides, everyone knows the Global Warming scam is to screw over the THIRD WORLD countries and China by stopping them expanding.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 11:29:48 2009 No.3922262 Conspiracy theorists: I am right. If you disagree, you have been brainwashed.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 11:29:48 2009 No.3922264 >>3922244 See a NGO controlled individual. I'm not a conservative, not an amerikkan and real environmental issues don't have much in common with the Greeny Gaia Cult and the carbon credit system

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 11:31:48 2009 No.3922272 >>3922262 Popular theorist: I am right. If you disagree, you must be a religious right-wing extremist conspiracy terrorist.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 11:33:48 2009 No.3922276 /jp/ - Economics/General

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 11:33:48 2009 No.3922280 >>3922250 If you want to say something than do so and stop acting like a butthurt child

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 11:33:48 2009 No.3922285 >>3922264 You have provided virtually no proof to back up your claims besides idle conjecture and assumptions.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 11:34:48 2009 No.3922291 >>3922280 >Zeitgeist >Troll >That is all.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 11:36:19 2009 No.3922298 [DELETED]

>>3922285
First of how am I supposed to provide proof? Walking above water or what? And second I'm not the one who plans to sell the public on a new paradigm shift so I don't have any reason to proof something unlike the banking interest financed NGOs and UN panels

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 11:36:48 2009 No.3922302

>>3922285
First of how am I supposed to provide proof? Walking over water or what? And second I'm not the one who plans to sell the public on a new paradigm shift so I don't have any reason to proof anything unlike the banking interest financed NGOs and UN panels

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 11:38:48 2009 No.3922310 >>3922302 >Making an assertion without supporting evidence and admitting it.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 11:38:48 2009 No.3922312 >>3922291 Still playing your childish games? I bet you are one of those who didn't believe me that th City of London is private property and even the monarchs have to ask permission to enter

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 11:41:48 2009 No.3922327 >>3922312 >Meanwhile people laugh at the person who believes the crap in zeitgeist

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 11:42:48 2009 No.3922330

>>3922310
Dude we are on an imageboard. To be able to post here you should be a grown-up person and I suppose that grown-ups understand how to operate search engines, book libraries and news portals. And you are one of those mind controlled fags who wouldn't read nor accept any material I gave you.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 11:45:48 2009 No.3922343 >>3922330 >implying that the internets are not controlled by the government supplying evil information to brainwash you. or hat the vast majority of the internet actually doesnt agree with you.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 11:46:48 2009 No.3922353 >>3922330 The irony. The same should be expected of you then.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 11:48:48 2009 No.3922364

Same with Pianka that I brought up here some weeks ago. Fags come in and tell me I'm crazy and that Pianko didn't really meant it that he wishes to exterminate 80% of the public by laboratory made viruses even when he says it in a speech. And then he shows himself in occult druid clothes at his university page, what a funny guy this Pianka. Loves druids and deadly viruses. How funny.

Or like the one dutch monarch who wrote in his book how he wishes to be reborn as a ebola virus to extinct humanity. I bet I must have imagined this.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 11:49:48 2009 No.3922371 >>3922364 So a couple of crazy guys means everyone is crazy?

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 11:51:48 2009 No.3922386

>>3922215 I see you are one of those NGO controlled liberals. blah blah blah
I didn't ask what carbon credits are, and whether or not climate change is real is irrelevant to my question. That is not the issue here. I asked specifically how carbon credits differ from money in your scenario, and why they are bad.

>And rationalizing isn't really what you said.
Now if we're going to start arguing semantics, might I suggest you look up the word "rationalize" in a dictionary. The word you are looking for is "ration."

>Rationalizing means that there is enough for all and that you would be able to afford it but aren't allowed to by the authorities because they have to fulfil some soviet style quotas based on xy year plans off of fraudulent scientific estimations
Except there isn't enough for all. Of anything. Period. The world has finite resources, and regardless of (real, scientifically sound) things like climate change, the ultimate fact is that the earth can only support a certain quantity of living things. At some point you must either ration resources, restrict the population, or both. Industrialization and modern science have eliminated many of the mechanisms that kept population in check in the past, and the longer and healthier we as a global society live the more of a problem it will be.

So I will modify my earlier question that you never answered. Given the statement above, what practical means do you propose to prevent the worldwide catastrophe of maxing out the sustainable population for the available resources?

You can point at anything and call it an injustice, but if you can't actually explain why it's bad or offer a practical way to avoid it then you're just pissing into the wind.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 11:52:48 2009 No.3922390 Conspiracy theorists: CRAZY SHIT HAPPENED IN THE PAST, THEREFORE MY CRAZY THEORY IS TOTALLY PLAUSIBLE, NAY PROBABLE.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 11:53:48 2009 No.3922399 I like how the conspiracy theorist completely ignores any rebuttal, and comes up with non sequitur arguments.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 11:57:48 2009 No.3922419

Or like John Holdren (another MIT and Stanford fag) the science advisor of the Obama administration who wrote together with another greeny the 'Population Bomb' P.R. Ehrlich in a high level policy paper entitiled "Ecoscience" about stuff like

• Women could be forced to abort their pregnancies, whether they wanted to or not;
• The population at large could be sterilized by infertility drugs intentionally put into the nation's drinking water or in food;
• Single mothers and teen mothers should have their babies seized from them against their will and given away to other couples to raise;
• People who "contribute to social deterioration" (i.e. undesirables) "can be required by law to exercise reproductive responsibility" -- in other words, be compelled to have abortions or be sterilized.
• A transnational "Planetary Regime" should assume control of the global economy and also dictate the most intimate details of Americans' lives -- using an armed international police force.

But I bet I'm really crazy ....

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:01:48 2009 No.3922437

>>3922371
Facepalm

>>3922399
In fact, you are the conspiracy theorist stating that I made this shit up to troll you. Proof is out there, you just have to seek it. I can't force nor do I wish to get 'this shit' shoved up your ass. Because of ignorant wish-believing fools like you tyrants rise to power. I hope you understand that.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:02:48 2009 No.3922443 >>3922437 If the proof is out there then why not show us some? Oh wait, you can't!

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:03:48 2009 No.3922446 >>3918856 >>3918858 This really would not work. Not like how you describe it.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:03:48 2009 No.3922447

>>3922419 But I bet I'm really crazy ....
Crazy? I don't know. Maybe you're just really stupid. Or really suggestible. Probably a combination of the three.

How about you answer my question for a change. Especially since it's related to what you just posted.

For the third time, what practical means do you propose to prevent the worldwide catastrophe of maxing out the sustainable population for the available resources that does not involve reproductive controls or rationing of resources?

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:03:48 2009 No.3922449 >>3922419 Nice non-sequitur argument there. No one was even arguing against population control in this thread. You're crazy for other reasons. The opinions of the few also do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the group.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:04:48 2009 No.3922452 Why not rent OP? A lot cheaper than buying and no taxes or maintance costs, plus you can more freely move to a better area if the local area should get bad.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:04:48 2009 No.3922454 >>3922443 It can be found on W W W DOT G O O G L E DOT C O M

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:06:48 2009 No.3922472

>>3922437
If you want me to go find proof for your argument, you find the proof for mine. Which you don't even know because you've been throwing out random factoids in hopes that one of them has any affect on discrediting my argument.

You made an assertion, you failed to provide support, and you failed to address any of the rebuttals. In America, it is the responsibility of the accuser to provide evidence for his case, not for the accused to provide evidence against the accuser's case, and certainly not for it.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:07:48 2009 No.3922477 >>3922454 SO CAN OTHER CRAP THAT DISPROVES THE CRAP YOUVE SAID ALSO I READ IT ON THE INTERNET IT MUST BE TRUE

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:07:48 2009 No.3922480
File: 49 KB, 450x402, bulls-robot-conspiracy.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>3922454
What do I type in? Insane ranting defense of irrational, disconnected conspiracy theory? Or do I just search for "proof"?

Pic related. GIS for "conspiracy proof"

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:08:48 2009 No.3922481

>>3922447
First have the most expensive and most expansive international research unit completely under public control and oversight to convict studies about this matter and then let the democracies decide.

And not having the most powerful banking and corporate interests decide on their own while forcing the rest of the world with mass destruction weapons to go along the plans to exterminate 95% of the public.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:09:48 2009 No.3922489 >>3922454 I have found this google website you are talking about. It asked me what I am searching for. I say I am searching for conspiracy theories. It gives me sites. One says UFO is real. One says UFO is fake. Which one do I beleive?

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:10:48 2009 No.3922496

>>3922472
Cool story bro but I don't intent do sell anybody on anything. Maybe you shoul revaluate your argument.

By the way getting your hands on books like Superclass or Tragey & Hope wouldn't hurt, and you should get it for free with the internet and stuff. Google, you know.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:11:48 2009 No.3922500 >>3922496 You're trying to sell this whole conspiracy theory shit. Then you get mad when people don't believe you.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:11:48 2009 No.3922503 >>3922496 Google is controlled by the Jews, didn't you know? You've been brainwashed by the Jews.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:13:48 2009 No.3922513

>>3922477
See. Now you can stop demanding 'proof' if you don't even know what you are demanding. Some of the technocratz write in their own books about the upcoming world government but they don't mean it so right? And if somebody collects this data and provide it's to the rest via the internet, it doesn't mean it's true because it's on the internet, right?

I suggest you use your brain for yourself and read some history and policy books. It's like one of those kiddies who ask how to become a hacker in day and just won't stop if you tell them to learn about computers.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:20:48 2009 No.3922535

>>3922472
I find it hilarious that you would challenge the established and universally accepted fundamental scientific facts pertaining to life on earth, offer no proof yourself, then point out it is the burden of the accuser to provide evidence for his claim. You, sir, are the accuser here. You are the one making outrageous claims and thus the burden of proof is on you.

Aside from that, I have made no assertions that can not be readily deduced by opening your fucking eyes and looking around. I have made three assertions that are relevant to this argument.
1) The earth's resources are finite. This is self-evident. The earth is of finite size and receives a finite amount of energy from the sun, thus it has a finite amount of resources.
2) The earth has a maximum carrying capacity. This is self-evident. Living things need certain quantities of resources to survive. If the available resources are limited, logically the population must be limited as well.
3) Exceeding the carrying capacity of the earth will result in disaster. This too is self-evident. When you have more people than resources, people die until you are back under the limit. Furthermore, the closer you get to the carrying capacity the more you exhaust all of the biological buffers, thus increasing the impact when you finally hit the wall. This has happened on a local scale countless times in history. This is not fringe science, it is absolute fact. Read a book.

Now, are you ready to answer my question? I didn't ask you to prove anything, I asked a simple question that should warrant a simple answer.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:21:48 2009 No.3922538

>>3922477
>See. Now you can stop demanding 'proof' if you don't even know what you are demanding.

Demanding proof to your relevant claims, not some random crazy shit that has nothing to do with the argument like the Grand Duchess of Portugal wears polka-dotted bloomers. You can just as easily find proof that refutes your arguments using google.

>Some of the technocratz write in their own books about the upcoming world government but they don't mean it so right?

You're crazy, and you seem like you actually mean what you say. It doesn't mean its true, and it doesn't mean random guy Bob, or the rest of the population thinks its true.

>And if somebody collects this data and provide it's to the rest via the internet, it doesn't mean it's true because it's on the internet, right?

And it could easily be not true, or skewed or taken out of context. I will say this, I have collected personal information about your health record, and a personal bio which indicates you are in the Royal British Asylum for the Mentally Insane, have an IQ of 87 and have a vast array of mental disorders. I am also putting this information on the internet via the website 4chan.org.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:22:48 2009 No.3922543 >>3922535 You're talking to the wrong person. I think.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:27:48 2009 No.3922565 >>3922364 >implying druids have anything to do with viruses

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:27:48 2009 No.3922570 >>3922565 >implying druids are occult

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:29:48 2009 No.3922578

>>3922481
First, you really didn't answer my question. I didn't ask about how we decide what to do, I asked what do we do. What if the institutes and democracies decide that population control and rationing of resources are the best solutions? You can't claim that they're bad if you can't explain why or offer an alternative solution. Come on, impress me with your brilliance. Obviously you have this all figured out.

>First have the most expensive and most expansive international research unit completely under public control and oversight
How do you propose to have the public oversee the scientific community? As it stands now, anybody can contribute and anybody can access the materials that are produced. The scientific community is a self-regulated loosely-organized society composed of hundreds of thousands of ordinary people who can come and go as they please. How do you get more public than that? Are you confusing politics and science by chance? Do we get to vote on reality now?

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:30:48 2009 No.3922586 >>3922578 >implying that the guy is brilliant

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:31:01 2009 No.3922595 [DELETED]

>>3922535
Read about Malthus.
The same people who you are labeling praising as 'established and universally accepted fundamental scientific facts' fags first predicted a new ice age and that the world wouldconsists of 10 billion people in 2000 if we didn't installed population control methods.

But you know what: Nothing happened. Hurr the conspiracy theorist were right durr but herp this can't be true so they didn't mean it derp

And no, man-made global warming has never been universaly accepted, nor established and in fact nothing has been proved until this day and age.
It's a very controversial theory, but the UN dictates the discussion so you won't get the opportubnity to hear the other sided which is called in a abbreviated ways as 'sceptics' to artificially create the image some holocaust denialing nazi.

Linguistics. You heard of?
Question? Which question? I said what should be done, would be a international study group under public oversight following a open public discussion and direct democratic votes. That's the only way. Period. Don't even start rationalizing your silly dictatorship. Because War is Peace amirite?

It's funny how those global warming nuts believe in their ideologies like a bunch religious hardlines while the world cooled down in the last 10 years. But I bet I'm just some lunatic and have to be re-educated.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:31:48 2009 No.3922590

>>3922535
While I agree on the basis of your conclusion for other reasons, your premises are flawed.
>1) The earth's resources are finite. This is self-evident. The earth is of finite size and receives a finite amount of energy from the sun, thus it has a finite amount of resources.
The sun provides effectively continuous energy to the earth. There is IS a finite amount of energy you can collect from the sun before it blows up, but it's ridiculous to think that it's going to be a factor in the next ten-thousand lifetimes.

What the issue here is usage of fuels or other energy sources that will exceed the current amount of energy provided by the sun, or that fossil fuels consumed will have an adverse effect on the climate (disputed)

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:31:48 2009 No.3922592 >>3922578 >implying a conspiracy theorist can argue his way out of a wet paper bag

>>	iRage !RAGEpq8/Ww Thu Dec 17 12:32:48 2009 No.3922598 You don't need to work full time if you don't want to spend money on extra things.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:33:48 2009 No.3922606 >>3922543 You're talking to the wrong person. I think. Indeed it would seem so. My apologies. It's late, I'm tired, and all the crazy is starting to give me a headache. I'm going to bed.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:34:48 2009 No.3922609

>>3922535
Read about Malthus.
The same people who you are labeling praising as 'established and universally accepted fundamental scientific facts' fags first predicted a new ice age and that the world wouldconsists of 10 billion people in 2000 if we didn't installed population control methods.

But you know what: Nothing happened. Hurr the conspiracy theorist were right durr but herp this can't be true so they didn't mean it derp

And no, man-made global warming has never been universally accepted, nor established and in fact nothing has been proved until this day and age.
It's a very controversial theory, but the UN dictates the discussion so you won't get the opportunity to listen to the other side which is called by corporate media and NGOs in a contemptuous way as 'sceptics' to artificially create the image of some holocaust denialing Nazis.

Linguistics. You heard of?
Question? Which question? I said what should be done, would be a international study group under public oversight following a open public discussion and direct democratic votes. That's the only way. Period. Don't even start rationalizing your silly dictatorship. Because War is Peace amirite?

It's funny how those global warming nuts believe in their ideologies like a bunch religious hardlines while the world cooled down in the last 10 years. But I bet I'm just some lunatic and have to be re-educated.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:34:48 2009 No.3922613 >>3922590 >climate (disputed) >http://lmgtfy.com/?q=global+warming >sees vast majority agrees with global warming and there are a few exceptions

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:35:48 2009 No.3922619 >>3922609 >proven >does not understand how science and scientific theory work

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:38:48 2009 No.3922636

>>3922578
Wrong and it was proved by Climategate. The scientists working for the UN panel rejected to share their data with the rest, even conspirated against it to deny FOI request and then suddenly they DESTROYED THE ORIGINAL DATA.

But they didn't mean it right? They just had to save storage room right? Who the fucks need original data right? The guys at the UN would never do such things herp derp

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:38:48 2009 No.3922638

>>3922609
No we didn't. You're attributing what a few people believed to mean the entire population. Second of all, those kinds of projections do not mean that will actually happen. They are done to show that if you continue doing something at the current rate, something bad will happen. A projection is not an actual prediction, the conclusion is that the current rate can't keep up. There are also countries that, gasp, actually do use population control.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:40:48 2009 No.3922648 >>3922636 You still haven't answered his question. And no one is saying people didn't mean to do things. Individuals and groups of individuals can do as they please. It does not mean that everyone is in cahoots with them.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:41:48 2009 No.3922654 >>3922609 Then its impossible to prove anything using your logic. There will always be dissenters who disagree. There are people who believe the brain in a vat (i.e. matrix) theory.

Lambda !DELTATiWVA Thu Dec 17 12:42:48 2009 No.3922660

>>3922513
If you can't believe google then let my tell you that we learned that CO2 is bad for the environmental cycle of cooling/warming at school too.
And actually google says so too.
You are various kinds of delusional.

Not to say that what you suggest is totally unreasonable, you just fail at basing it on anything but your opinion.

>>3922590
Can't transform energy to matter on that scale yet. there's a limited amount of immediately accessible resources fit for cultivating crops.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:43:48 2009 No.3922667

>>3922636
I'm not taking sides here, so that's why I'm saying (disputed)
>>3922613
The reason for the "conspiracy" to delete data was because the scientist in question was British (SHOCK) and UK law would have forced him to disclose data which he was under contract not to disclose.

If he had disclosed that data he'd have been sued by the the people who had provided him with that data who had a contract with him NOT to disclose it.

Also, yeah the files were destroyed back in the 1980s when they were back on magnetic tapes still.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:44:48 2009 No.3922670 >>3922660 Those are NGO controlled websites, you're being brainwashed. Only look at the ones that support my claims /sarcasm Or at least thats what I think he would say.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:44:48 2009 No.3922676 >>3922638 I never did. Stop creating arguments out of thin air

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:45:48 2009 No.3922678 >>3922660 I was taking issue with the word "finite". We're not going to run out of sunlight any time soon.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:45:48 2009 No.3922681

>>3922590
My intention wasn't to imply that the energy from the sun was the deciding factor in human survival. My point was that the sun is the only significant contributor of energy to the earth, and that energy is finite. If all inputs are finite, the output is finite as well.

Obviously many other resources play a much more direct role in the sustainability of human life on the planet. I thought that would have gone without saying, but perhaps I wasn't sufficiently clear.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:47:48 2009 No.3922691 >>3921453 You and I have totally different concepts of what makes a system "efficient".

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:47:48 2009 No.3922696 Guys, this guy is going to defend his stance no matter how wrong he is. Thats how crazy people are.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:47:48 2009 No.3922697

>>3922681
It's clear what you intended but to make such a bold statement effectively saying "lol sun is going to run out of energy" is just asking for someone to jump on your argument and make a fool out of you.

Hell, I agree with your point of view, but just stick with the "running out of fossil fuels" if I were you. Simplifying things too far can backfire.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:50:48 2009 No.3922713

>>3922667
They made this argument up. The research unit is funded by tax-payers money and you even defend them who create their own science in the basement so that nobody can review their data. Peer-Review and public oversight, you heard of?
This is like saying Hitler doesn't have to proof this Esoteric-Eugenic-Rascist theories because he would have to provide the public with data of other researchers.

>>3922648
Read about politics and sociology. Controlling the minds is the most important factors. See religion.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:51:48 2009 No.3922715

>>3922667
Also a bit of an important not to this, they only destroyed their COPY of the data. The original owner still has the original data, and you can get a copy of it too if you follow the appropriate procedures.

And then there's the fact that numerous other totally independent and readily available data sets show the exact same thing. But what's the fun in that?

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:54:48 2009 No.3922730 >>3922713 And yet again with the non-sequitur arguments.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:55:48 2009 No.3922735 >>3922713 Guy: "Something" Conspiracy theorist: No, not "something" they made it up to trick you

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:56:48 2009 No.3922742

>>3922715
Cool story bro but you can't spam the label of origina. Original data was destroyed they have only the copied data which nobody was able to verify. Their computer models are silly at best as scientist still cannot fully understand the climate of the Earth and historic data is very limited. And then they used silly statistic methods to prove their point. You can prove everything with statistics.

Do you understand this?

SCIENTIST DO NOT UNDERSTAND CLIMATE
ORIGINAL DATA DESTROYED
HISTORIC DATA VERY LIMITED
MOST WEATHER STATIONS IN THE US ARE USELESS
STATISTIC TRICKS ARE BEING USED WITH DIFFERENT SETS OF DATA

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:58:48 2009 No.3922750 >>3922742 Or maybe its people with an agenda tricking you? People who might possibly benefit from global warming not existing? Maybe like oil companies?

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:58:48 2009 No.3922751

>>3922697 lol sun is going to run out of energy
Fuck I should just drop this.

That's not at all what I said. I said that the earth has finite resources and that it can receive a finite amount of energy from the sun. There is nothing incorrect in that statement and I stand behind it 100%.

The purpose of that was to illustrate the self-evidence of the basic foundation of my argument. Fossil fuels are a more immediately relevant issue, but there are plenty of other energy options out there. The purpose was to illustrate that somewhere out there, regardless of how anybody twists the arguments about contemporary science, there is a functional limit to the Earth's resources. My decision not to name any specific resources was deliberate.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 12:59:48 2009 No.3922752

>>3922713
Why would they make the argument up and email it on their SECURE EMAIL SERVER?

If you actually read the emails in question this is EXACTLY what the scientist in question was talking about when he wrote the emails.

Or are you suggesting they KNEW the emails were going to be broken into and planted a fake conspiracy email to throw the tracks off the REAL conspiracy?

Now, while they're fairly blameless for any actual conspiracy going on, they're complete bastards for coding so fucking terribly. They SHOULD have had peer review over their modelling, it's fucked up and I'm glad that it's in the open.

Note: There are more than one climate change scientific models being produced, so this has discredited one out of several, and you'll note that there's no OMG SECRIT CONSPIRACY shown on that PRIVATE email server.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 13:01:48 2009 No.3922759 >>3922742 Have you ever actually read any of these studies? I mean read the actual science straight from the journal, not articles on some wackjob blog. You have no idea what you're talking about.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 13:02:48 2009 No.3922765 >>3922750 Big corporate interests are backing the agenda dude. the anglo-xaxon and european oil companies are controlled by big banking interests and those interests are funding the climate church NGOs

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 13:05:48 2009 No.3922775 >>3922765 Your logic makes no sense. The oil industry is not allowed to have an agenda of its own?

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 13:06:48 2009 No.3922782 >>3922752 Whistleblowers. First they gave the data to the BBC, they refused to report the data so they were forced to (lol hack) upload the data onto russian servers and inform the blogosphere about it

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 13:09:48 2009 No.3922792 >>3922782 See, that'd almost be believable if you didn't realise the climate scientists were even decent coders instead of the shit coders they are.

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 13:11:48 2009 No.3922801

>>3922775
Read Engdahl's War on Oil book and research for yourself. The only rogue entities are South Amerikkans, Arabs and the Russians. The Arabs have nothing to say, however the House of Saud is an British Empire and US Empire ally since the WWs. The rest is insignificant except Russian interests

Anonymous Thu Dec 17 13:13:48 2009 No.3922807

>>3922792
What are you talking about? Maybe time to upgrade your denial firmware to the level of the rest of the denial fags in this thread. The data has been officially confirmed and investigations have started (however they won't go anywhere if you know what I mean)

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 13:16:48 2009 No.3922815 >The Arabs have nothing to say, however the House of Saud is an British Empire and US Empire ally since the WWs. The rest is insignificant except Russian interests Are you from like 70 years ago or sometihng?

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 13:19:48 2009 No.3922822 >>3922801 I give up, I'm going to bed. I could find 10 reliable sources to disprove what you say for every 1 you can manage to find. Then you'd just say they have NGO backing and doing count. I'm going to bed, you can enjoy being crazy by yourself.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 13:33:48 2009 No.3922872 File: 430 KB, 800x600, work.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 13:34:48 2009 No.3922877 File: 409 KB, 800x600, work2.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 13:40:48 2009 No.3922899 >>3922877 This is why you go to college, and get a degree in something you enjoy, so you can get paid mass quantities for doing something you love.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 13:49:48 2009 No.3922930 Planning to vanish into academia never to be seen again seems easier.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 16:29:48 2009 No.3923585 >>3922899 hahaha owow Dude they can get a bunch of asians or indians who will work harder than you for less money. Have fun of never being able to pay back your student loans

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 16:31:48 2009 No.3923598 >>3920740 >/jp/ (Morgan) - Finance/General Fucking LoL

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 16:33:48 2009 No.3923607 A weaboo hippy.

>>	Lambda !DELTATiWVA Thu Dec 17 17:10:48 2009 No.3923784 >>3922872 >>3922877 Uh, is that some kind of VN?

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 17 20:32:48 2009 No.3924721 >>3923784 Swan Song. It's a salaryman that went insane after the town is completely destroyed.

Reply to thread

Name
E-mail
Subject
Comment
Action

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]