Do or Die
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
10-10-2016, 09:32 PM
RE: Do or Die
(10-10-2016 07:19 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(10-10-2016 05:02 PM)Chas Wrote:  Since you seemingly have no empathy, no compassion, and no understanding of what harm is, we're done here.
I have very little knowledge of what your own personal definition of "harm" is.
With regards to my own empathy or compassion, well I haven't even discussed that topic, but hey, you seem to think that you know me.
(10-10-2016 05:02 PM)Chas Wrote:  You are a sociopath
Well, thank you Dr Doolittle, I guess you are qualified to make such judgements.

Dude, what else are we supposed to do? You're talking out of your ass. If you refuse to acknowledge the possibility of very real harm being done, what else are we supposed to infer? When you ignore the damage being done, it makes you appear to be indifferent to it; and when you actively argue that it's not important, it makes you look complacent with it. Both appear to be incredibly callous, indicative of a lack of empathy.

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like EvolutionKills's post
10-10-2016, 09:59 PM (This post was last modified: 10-10-2016 10:04 PM by Stevil.)
RE: Do or Die
(10-10-2016 09:32 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Dude, what else are we supposed to do? You're talking out of your ass. If you refuse to acknowledge the possibility of very real harm being done, what else are we supposed to infer? When you ignore the damage being done, it makes you appear to be indifferent to it; and when you actively argue that it's not important, it makes you look complacent with it. Both appear to be incredibly callous, indicative of a lack of empathy.
Are you and Chas a symbiant being?
You speak as if you are joined at the hippocampus.

Anyway, I really don't know what you are on about. The discussion is about economics, not about the morality of doing business or the harm that some business activities can cause. That would be an entirely different topic.
People can cause harm, businesses can cause harm, the weather can cause harm. I mean really, WTF are you on about?


Honestly it's like trying to discuss making buildings.
Person A: we need more builders.
Person Z: But builders cause harm!
Person A: So can police and window washers and dancers.
Person Z: But I want you to admit that builders cause harm.
Person A: I want to talk about making buildings, to do this we need builders.
Person Z: But why won't you admit that builders cause harm?
Person A: WTF are you on about?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-10-2016, 11:10 PM
RE: Do or Die
(27-09-2016 10:38 AM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  
(27-09-2016 12:42 AM)The Dark One Wrote:  I am basing my opinion of the middle east on substantial time spent there, in person, on the ground and in the air, dealing first hand with our "allies" (often not an accurate word there) and also with our enemies. I have been in and out of the middle east since 1989. Believe it or not, I know a little bit about the region and its people.

Yeah, I lived in Iran for four years and was stationed in Saudi for a short tour as well. My experiences don't comport with yours.

What plane was it you had to punch out of? When did this happen?

... still wonderin' ...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-10-2016, 11:31 PM
RE: Do or Die
(10-10-2016 07:23 PM)Stevil Wrote:  Laws can be created outside the context of moral beliefs, they can be created for practical reasons, for reasons of perceived consequences, sustainability and stability for example rather than what is believed to be right or wrong.
For example we harm animals all the time, we whip horses, we lock up birds and dogs, we kill sheep and cows, we imprison pigs and chickens.
Sheep, cows, pigs and chickens don't get a choice. There *are* large numbers of people who advocate against cruel practices in farming.

Quote:With regards to humans, we compete against each other, we steal girlfriends, we win jobs that others want. There is nothing wrong with benefiting at the expense of others. We must compete.
But compete to the point of crushing the other guy's hope of a better life? Grasp so much in the effort to be rich that there's nothing much left for others? If the conditions of your job interview were a. that you were virtually certain to be hired b. that whoever else applied and failed to get it would be shot and c. that it was compulsory to apply, would you still be so keen for competition or would you say "there's something fucked up with this system"?

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
10-10-2016, 11:58 PM
RE: Do or Die
(10-10-2016 11:31 PM)morondog Wrote:  But compete to the point of crushing the other guy's hope of a better life? Grasp so much in the effort to be rich that there's nothing much left for others? If the conditions of your job interview were a. that you were virtually certain to be hired b. that whoever else applied and failed to get it would be shot and c. that it was compulsory to apply, would you still be so keen for competition or would you say "there's something fucked up with this system"?
Yes, well. If we shot the potential employees then supply would go down and wages would go up. That wouldn't be good for business.

What we were talking about in this thread was whether to support the growth of business in order to create jobs or whether we increase taxes and wages and whether that results in more or less jobs.

I have no idea why we are now talking about shooting failed job candidates?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-10-2016, 12:21 AM
RE: Do or Die
(10-10-2016 11:58 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(10-10-2016 11:31 PM)morondog Wrote:  But compete to the point of crushing the other guy's hope of a better life? Grasp so much in the effort to be rich that there's nothing much left for others? If the conditions of your job interview were a. that you were virtually certain to be hired b. that whoever else applied and failed to get it would be shot and c. that it was compulsory to apply, would you still be so keen for competition or would you say "there's something fucked up with this system"?
Yes, well. If we shot the potential employees then supply would go down and wages would go up. That wouldn't be good for business.

What we were talking about in this thread was whether to support the growth of business in order to create jobs or whether we increase taxes and wages and whether that results in more or less jobs.

I have no idea why we are now talking about shooting failed job candidates?

It's an analogy. Honestly man, it's like talking to a wall. There's such a total disconnect between our ways of thinking that I'm starting to think there's no point trying.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like morondog's post
11-10-2016, 12:59 AM
RE: Do or Die
He disbelieves morality, even relative morality. The only thing I think about someone like that is sociopath.

Sorry, Stevil, but you've had it coming for a while now.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-10-2016, 01:12 AM
RE: Do or Die
Stevil, what's your take on Martin Shkreli, the dickhead who jacked up the price of that AIDS drug for no reason whatsoever other than that he can screw people out of more money?

That's a sound business decision right? Profits are glorious things. Perfectly legal.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Shk...ontroversy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Shk...ontroversy

Quote:On September 17, 2015, Dave Muoio of Healio, an in-depth clinical information website for health care specialists,[63] reported on a letter from the Infectious Diseases Society of America and the HIV Medicine Association to executives at Turing,[64] questioning a new pricing for Daraprim.[61] The price of a dose of the drug in the U.S. market increased from US$13.50 to US$750 per pill, overnight, a 5,456-percent increase.[65]

The price increase was initially criticized, jointly, by the Infectious Diseases Society of America and the HIV Medicine Association,[59][64] by the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America,[66] and soon thereafter by presidential candidates Hillary Clinton,[67] Bernie Sanders,[68] and Donald Trump.[69] A subsequent organized effort called on Turing to return pricing to pre-September levels and to address several matters relating to the needs of patients, an effort that garnered endorsements from more than 160 medical‑specialty and patient‑related organizations (as of December 2015, 164 organizations from thirty-one states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico).[70][71]

In response to the controversy, the record label Collect Records publicly ended its business relationship with Shkreli, who had invested in the company.[72]

In a September 2015 interview with Bloomberg Markets, Shkreli claimed that despite the price increase, patient co-pays would actually be lower, that many patients would get the drug at no cost, that Turing had expanded its free drug program, and that it sold half of its drugs for one dollar.[73] He defended the price hike by saying, "If there was a company that was selling an Aston Martin at the price of a bicycle, and we buy that company and we ask to charge Toyota prices, I don’t think that that should be a crime."[74][75] A few days later, Shkreli announced that he planned to lower the price by an unspecified amount, "in response to the anger that was felt by people".[44] But in late November, Turing reversed course and said it would not lower the price after all.[76] Following a request by Senator Bernie Sanders and Representative Elijah Cummings for details of Turing Pharmaceuticals' finances and price-setting practices in September 2015,[77][78] the company hired four lobbyists from Buchanan, Ingersoll & Rooney with backgrounds in health care legislation and pharmaceutical pricing.[79][80] In addition to the lobbyists, Shkreli hired a crisis public relations firm to help explain the pricing decision.[81]

This is why unfettered capitalism is a bad idea. ETA: Bolding mine. This is all perfectly legal, but the guy's clearly up to no good.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-10-2016, 01:42 AM
RE: Do or Die
(10-10-2016 09:59 PM)Stevil Wrote:  Anyway, I really don't know what you are on about.

Yes, you have made that abundantly clear.


(10-10-2016 09:59 PM)Stevil Wrote:  The discussion is about economics, not about the morality of doing business or the harm that some business activities can cause. That would be an entirely different topic.

Translation: I like things black and white, why do you insist on adding grey into the mix?


(10-10-2016 09:59 PM)Stevil Wrote:  People can cause harm, businesses can cause harm, the weather can cause harm. I mean really, WTF are you on about?

Your indifference and the seemingly complete denial of culpability for the parties involved.


(10-10-2016 09:59 PM)Stevil Wrote:  Honestly it's like trying to discuss making buildings.
Person A: we need more builders.
Person Z: But builders cause harm!
Person A: So can police and window washers and dancers.
Person Z: But I want you to admit that builders cause harm.
Person A: I want to talk about making buildings, to do this we need builders.
Person Z: But why won't you admit that builders cause harm?
Person A: WTF are you on about?

It's more like you're only concerned that builders construct buildings, while everyone else is worried about the damage they might do to the environment or the native inhabitants in the process. But when we bring this up, you're like "WTF are you on about? They're builders! Why are you concerned with how they build?"

And the rest of us are over here, staring agog at your ability to both somehow claim that you care while butting heads with us over our actual caring about it. You come across as talking out of both sides of your mouth.

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes EvolutionKills's post
11-10-2016, 02:01 AM
RE: Do or Die
(11-10-2016 12:59 AM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  He disbelieves morality, even relative morality. The only thing I think about someone like that is sociopath.

Sorry, Stevil, but you've had it coming for a while now.
Owwww.
Really, I mean, many idiots assume lack of belief in morality = sociopath.
Fuckin stupid conclusion, but, hey whatever.

I mean really, If you want to know if I have empathy then ask, don't assume from a philosophical standpoint.
It's like saying that atheists can't be good without a belief in god.

You are saying that I can't have empathy if I don't have a belief in moral rights, wrongs and obligations. Where is the logic in that thinking?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: