Hey, when you're right, you're right, brah... Pretty fuckin lame, lol.
<<< Fixed.
@Teguh: Your posts...you...I mean...Erm...Mate...
Ahh, fuckit.
Google Money Tree Update
- Thread starter teguh123
- Start date
Hey, when you're right, you're right, brah... Pretty fuckin lame, lol.
<<< Fixed.
@Teguh: Your posts...you...I mean...Erm...Mate...
Ahh, fuckit.
That is exactly my point
.It's not a rethorical question. The answer lies deep in the very structure of humans' political structure.
I'd say it's the following. Laws are not there to protect justice. Laws are there to protect the interests of whoever makes the law, which may include maintaining illusion or perception of justice, sometimes truthfully. I got the idea from an interview of PETA (indonesian's troops under japanese occupation) members. The guy said that when Japs rule, the japs said that they ain't care if people are stealing and robbing. They care about anti japs sentiments.
The same way US governments don't really care whether a trade is consensual or not. Maybe they do a little bit. They care for their own interests, namely maximizing controls of the everyone. Google money tree don't pay up enough to congress. That's the issue.
Also humans have many zero sum games aspects of life. We're actually by nature, enemies or competitors. We just don't talk about it. After all not everyone is "THEM". There have to be enough "US" to fight "THEM" whoever that US and THEM is. Many divisions are indeed Nash equlibrium and certain people prefer certain division more than another. KKK, for example, prefer race. Libertarian, for example, prefer non victimless criminals as "Them". Muslims prefers faith as divisor. It's only till recently the dividing land is ideology. Free market is winning.
So we don't talk about the zero sum game aspect among "US". We don't question why marriage must be monogamy (women acquisition is zero sum game). We don't question why MDMA is illegal despite being saver than cigarette (power is zero sum game). Also why Government screw e-gold, rather than aiming for the actual ponzy's (well, dollar is not backed by gold, again control of economy is zero sum game).
What we don't talk honestly, is what we don't understand. All of us are lying to each other. It's the realm of religion, superstition, and government. If I am an emperor, I would say God made me an emperor, to confuse other emperor wannabe. I wouldn't say a more realistic theory that I become an emperor because I stab the former one in the back and can bullshit my way out to the population after ling chi -ing a few that disagree.
It never is about the interest of the consenting parties. It's the interest of those that want to control the parties. It never is about honesty. It's about confusing and lying to everyone else. Unfortunately by embracing lies and faith, we ended up lying to our self too.
Perhaps, as Budha says, enlightment is indeed a way out of this stupid cycle. Hail Adam Smith, for enlightening us that humans are selfish.
And why power? Some might ask? Libertarian do not like power over others. Why power?
Well, what does the Nazi had that the Jews didn't? What did the Turks had that the Armenian didn't? What did the Mongols had that the Baghdad citizens didn't?
Money? Think again.
Money without power is like putting a wanted sign. Cash for whoever can come up with justification to kill me, do it, and get away with it.
Power, is then true wealth. It's stupid to work all our life just for money. Do it, and you'll end up like Beatty Chadwick. Love of money is root of looking evil and get fucked over. Love of power kicks ass.
I am gonna be a dictator. Then I'll fuck over everyone else. Because that's the only thing worth pursuing. That's the kind of attitude everyone must have. Of course, to trick others into giving me power I got to pretend I am angel.
Capitalists do not have to convince others that they're unselfish. Capitalists need only to explain (wrongfully, though honestly) that their interests are in line with everyone else anyway.
Those who go the extra mile of trying to look like angels are usually then the vilest demons. They said they're an angel. Which mean they lied. Why would they lie? Because their interests are not aligned with us. What will they become? Demons.
That's the point of true enlightenment. Becoming devils yourself.
Fuck one of my server is down. Got to fix that. Back to the real world, embracing my job as a lowly techie in my own biz
. No one else that worked for me can do that . Must admit Suharto did have far better leadership skills.
Well, what does the Nazi had that the Jews didn't? What did the Turks had that the Armenian didn't? What did the Mongols had that the Baghdad citizens didn't?
Money? Think again.
Money without power is like putting a wanted sign. Cash for whoever can come up with justification to kill me, do it, and get away with it.
Power, is then true wealth. It's stupid to work all our life just for money. Do it, and you'll end up like Beatty Chadwick. Love of money is root of looking evil and get fucked over. Love of power kicks ass.
I am gonna be a dictator. Then I'll fuck over everyone else. Because that's the only thing worth pursuing. That's the kind of attitude everyone must have. Of course, to trick others into giving me power I got to pretend I am angel.
Capitalists do not have to convince others that they're unselfish. Capitalists need only to explain (wrongfully, though honestly) that their interests are in line with everyone else anyway.
Those who go the extra mile of trying to look like angels are usually then the vilest demons. They said they're an angel. Which mean they lied. Why would they lie? Because their interests are not aligned with us. What will they become? Demons.
That's the point of true enlightenment. Becoming devils yourself.
Fuck one of my server is down. Got to fix that. Back to the real world, embracing my job as a lowly techie in my own biz
. No one else that worked for me can do that . Must admit Suharto did have far better leadership skills.
would still like an answer on my question about issues with clumsy disorganized movements or hearing voices.
Great. Buyers' discretion. What about if buyers decide that they want short term marriage, or polyandry, or polygamy, or same sex marriage, or prostitution? I thought buyers and sellers usually write their own contract. So what the fuck is legislators doing writing the contract for them.
Imagine if someone's put gun in your head and you give your wallet. Is that consensual?
There is a faith worse than death, called extinction. There is a power greater than those who can kill you, namely the power that says, "Don't get laid till you get married." That power is weaken, but still societies can greatly restrict many form of relationship that directly competes with marriage.
Would you give your wallet if the alternative, namely living without surrendering your wallet, is easy? I don't think so.
Would people get married if all alternatives are legal and can be practiced openly for all to do? I don't think so. Well, at least there are very good reason why 50% of babies are born outside marriage in US, compared to in Arab. The alternatives are the market choice. Will be even more so when government interfere less. I actually write another topic for this.
Basically "fairer more explicit" deals will attract better objects. Porn, for example, in contrast to burqha, will attract the pretty. However, as better objects move to better market, buyers will find those on the original market "worse". So buyers too will move to better market. At the end, everybody moves.
This process called adverse selection explains why insurance companies want to discriminate you based on your genes. Discriminating insurance companies is a "fairer more explicit" market. Governments of course prohibits that.
It's the same reason why religious ideas get worst and worst. With internet and science, all the better ideas already fly to those better market.
The same way marriage will be replaced by better market. It just that for that to happen, the alternative market will have to be legal AND seen. This is something government prevent with criminalization and censorship. But their power is cracking out.
You think marriage is consensual. Well many think David Cooperfield eliminated liberty statues. There is a trick on things. Yes you can have cakes and eat it too.
Marriage is like an operating system. Imagine if Microsoft censors all Mac ads. Can you consensually say that people buy microsoft's product consensually?
Well porn is censored for minors. The same way, escort, while legal, can only be done secretly.That's promotion of one system over the others.
As I said, it's not about the interest of the consenting parties. It's the interest of those who wants to control the party. Why alimony is so expensive?
Imagine if it's cheap. Then Beatty Chadwick can just marry strings of women and divorcing them latter. The women may not mind. The other males would mind.
Religious bigots just want to dominate the operating system market. No I am not blaming them. I am blaming everyone now, especially my self, for not trying to be as evil as them.
Discussion about google money tree is also available on the net.
As for robbers, either we kill those robbers, or we join them. Why be victims?
The same goes for dictators. People opposes free market means they want to be dictators and slave owners over us. So power is part of the game ha? Either prohibit it (libertarian), or join them (be dictators). Why be the victim?
That's the idea.
One or the other.
As for robbers, either we kill those robbers, or we join them. Why be victims?
The same goes for dictators. People opposes free market means they want to be dictators and slave owners over us. So power is part of the game ha? Either prohibit it (libertarian), or join them (be dictators). Why be the victim?
That's the idea.
One or the other.
And why power? Some might ask? Libertarian do not like power over others. Why power?
Well, what does the Nazi had that the Jews didn't? What did the Turks had that the Armenian didn't? What did the Mongols had that the Baghdad citizens didn't?
Money? Think again.
Money without power is like putting a wanted sign. Cash for whoever can come up with justification to kill me, do it, and get away with it.
Power, is then true wealth. It's stupid to work all our life just for money. Do it, and you'll end up like Beatty Chadwick. Love of money is root of looking evil and get fucked over. Love of power kicks ass.
I am gonna be a dictator. Then I'll fuck over everyone else. Because that's the only thing worth pursuing. That's the kind of attitude everyone must have. Of course, to trick others into giving me power I got to pretend I am angel.
Capitalists do not have to convince others that they're unselfish. Capitalists need only to explain (wrongfully, though honestly) that their interests are in line with everyone else anyway.
Those who go the extra mile of trying to look like angels are usually then the vilest demons. They said they're an angel. Which mean they lied. Why would they lie? Because their interests are not aligned with us. What will they become? Demons.
That's the point of true enlightenment. Becoming devils yourself.
Fuck one of my server is down. Got to fix that. Back to the real world, embracing my job as a lowly techie in my own biz
Here's the scary part, folks... I don't think he's kidding. He really believes this garbage. "MDMA is saver than cigarettes"?
HUH??
Tegster, if you really believe all that "Fuck You and Hooray For Me" spew, there's a label for you, dude... The term is "Sociopath".
Fuck "Banning"... I vote "Retroactive Abortion".
Just sayin'...
teguh you're an idiot.
if you had half a brain bro you would just stfu and keep this shit to urself
stop bumping this thread and plz dont make posts that dont put a good light on the industry
if you had half a brain bro you would just stfu and keep this shit to urself
stop bumping this thread and plz dont make posts that dont put a good light on the industry
As I said "the above is rather tongue in cheek I do agree with the sentiment". I do not believe that fraud is justifiable and don't believe people should be misled into buying something that doesn't turn out the way they were sold it.
However I do think marriage laws are fucked up. Please justify why a woman should get half a mans estate if for example they are married a couple of years and he was rich before they met? I just don't get it.
It creates a society like we have today with whores (there is no better word for them) going around marrying gullible old men for their money with every intention of divorcing them or trying to outlive them in the short term (like when the girl is 18 and he is 80). This is the new "career" choice for pretty young girls, as well as stripping and "glamor" modelling. Ridiculous state of affairs and is helping to destroy what is left of our "society".
Go look at some statistics on the number of fatalities caused by MDMA and then look at how many are caused by cigarettes.
Again I don't really agree with what the OP is saying, but stupid statements like above are really cringe worthy.
It is the people in power who tell us what harms us and what doesn't, and 99.9% of the time they do this to serve their own interests and not those of the society.
The most dangerous and lethal "drugs" on this planet are alcohol and cigarettes and that is a fact. Do they ban them? No they make too much money off them and there would be riots on the streets if they tried to ban them outright anyway. They just push up the prices and make MORE money and people think that they are doing this to trying to reduce the number of smokers and alcoholics, genius!
Check it out, and bare in mind this is per 100,000 USERS and so does take into account that there are more drinkers and smokers than users of MDMA:
@ Nickster:
Wow, that's the most fucked up argument for drug abuse I've ever heard... Or wasn't that your point? See I took it as a "Statement", because that's what it looked like. "Correct" me if I misunderstood...
I wasn't making any "Statement" in my prior post, much less a "Stupid" one, mate... and I never "Stated" anything about the "Lethality" of anything. But let's tackle that issue head on...
At one point in my life, I fit into every ONE of those target groups myself- at once. I was a two pack a day, case of beer a week doper, who did X probably once every couple of months, among other subs.
Let's do the math:
You tell ME which had the greatest potential to harm me over the course of that year (and others around me, which is the important stat). Your chart implies it would be the Cigarettes, but those numbers don't count intake, or take intangibles or social costs into account.
Here's what I think: It was the X. See, I could smoke 10 packs of cigs a day and still produce- operate a vehicle... Fly a plane... or Drive a forklift at work. I could even do all that after my average three beers a day. But not trippin' balls on MDMA, or even whacked out of my gourd on thai stick :rasta:
So you can stick that graph back in your ass where it came from- it's completely irrelevant to the issue, and is stupider than no numbers at all.
And before anyone jumps down my throat and calls me "Anti-Drug" let me assure you that Ain't So... I would vote in a heartbeat for anyone who made a serious push to legalize almost Everything, but I would want restrictions to protect my kids, family, and the public at large.
Ideally, I would give dopers Nebraska or something... And let Teguh be King
Oh, and can all the "People In Power", and "Them" and "They" shit, dude - Lay off the bong for a couple of weeks until the paranoia eases, then take off your tin-foil beanie and go get involved and help change shit. Them and They is who You tell them to be.
Wow, that's the most fucked up argument for drug abuse I've ever heard... Or wasn't that your point? See I took it as a "Statement", because that's what it looked like. "Correct" me if I misunderstood...
I wasn't making any "Statement" in my prior post, much less a "Stupid" one, mate... and I never "Stated" anything about the "Lethality" of anything. But let's tackle that issue head on...
At one point in my life, I fit into every ONE of those target groups myself- at once. I was a two pack a day, case of beer a week doper, who did X probably once every couple of months, among other subs.
Let's do the math:
- 14,600 Ciggys (probably closer to 16,000 due to drinky nights )
- 1,248 Beers (not including keggers, of course- no way to track those)
- 6 Hits of X.
You tell ME which had the greatest potential to harm me over the course of that year (and others around me, which is the important stat). Your chart implies it would be the Cigarettes, but those numbers don't count intake, or take intangibles or social costs into account.
Here's what I think: It was the X. See, I could smoke 10 packs of cigs a day and still produce- operate a vehicle... Fly a plane... or Drive a forklift at work. I could even do all that after my average three beers a day. But not trippin' balls on MDMA, or even whacked out of my gourd on thai stick :rasta:
So you can stick that graph back in your ass where it came from- it's completely irrelevant to the issue, and is stupider than no numbers at all.
And before anyone jumps down my throat and calls me "Anti-Drug" let me assure you that Ain't So... I would vote in a heartbeat for anyone who made a serious push to legalize almost Everything, but I would want restrictions to protect my kids, family, and the public at large.
Ideally, I would give dopers Nebraska or something... And let Teguh be King
Oh, and can all the "People In Power", and "Them" and "They" shit, dude - Lay off the bong for a couple of weeks until the paranoia eases, then take off your tin-foil beanie and go get involved and help change shit. Them and They is who You tell them to be.
Thanks for saving me the trouble. Nickster, you can't be serious, that chart is the dumbest fucking thing I've ever seen.
brb smoking
Well that shows the conditioning of the weak minds actually works 
I guess the fact that Alcohol is PROVEN to be the cause of more deaths than any other "drug" is completely false eh?
By the way to say that 6 tabs of ecstasy had a more detrimental effect on you than 1,248 beers clearly shows that the alcohol has killed a few more of your brain cells than most.
For the record I have tried (more than just tried) most of those drugs in my life apart from heroin, crack and metamphetamines, but now I have grown up I neither crave nor desire them any more.
I believe that young people need to be protected from harmful drugs, but I believe that should be more through education than prohibition and rhetoric (young people tend to see through the bullshit). Alcohol kills more young people than any other substance (controlled or otherwise) and comparing it to marijuana is like comparing being shot to being punched lightly on the arm.
But you go ahead and listen to the rhetoric as apposed to the facts, it makes people like you mailable and much easier to control. Moron!
I guess the fact that Alcohol is PROVEN to be the cause of more deaths than any other "drug" is completely false eh?
By the way to say that 6 tabs of ecstasy had a more detrimental effect on you than 1,248 beers clearly shows that the alcohol has killed a few more of your brain cells than most.
For the record I have tried (more than just tried) most of those drugs in my life apart from heroin, crack and metamphetamines, but now I have grown up I neither crave nor desire them any more.
I believe that young people need to be protected from harmful drugs, but I believe that should be more through education than prohibition and rhetoric (young people tend to see through the bullshit). Alcohol kills more young people than any other substance (controlled or otherwise) and comparing it to marijuana is like comparing being shot to being punched lightly on the arm.
But you go ahead and listen to the rhetoric as apposed to the facts, it makes people like you mailable and much easier to control. Moron!
@tjdaz: Lolz- have a hit for me, mate. I wish I could, but it makes me too fuckin stupid (that used to be the point as I recall, though!)
FWIW, I'd far rather hang out with heads than drunks... FAR nicer people. But if I personally hadn't quit while I was "Ahead", I'd look like THIS dude today:
@ Nickster: Go back and read my post sober, you silly little cunt. Nowhere do I state that X was "more detrimental" to me at all. Nor was a comparison made except extremely tenuously between grass and booze. I simply gave an "opinion" that XTC had "The Greatest Potential" for harm, all arguments considered.
I am also the Least "malleable" person you have ever met, babe... And even harder to insult than I am to control. But you've really piqued my interest here... give us a baseline so we can discover just how "Grown Up" you think you are exactly. I'm 49, married, with 2 children, one right in the fucking danger zone at 14. Show me yours now :nopenope:
I (and her mom and teachers) got my 21 year old through it fine, without a single platitude, cliche, or bit of rhetoric. But at the end of the day, the threat of the law put a huge dampening effect on the urge to experiment. Tell us, how did all the "education" work out for you, mate?
Moron, indeed...
FWIW, I'd far rather hang out with heads than drunks... FAR nicer people. But if I personally hadn't quit while I was "Ahead", I'd look like THIS dude today:
@ Nickster: Go back and read my post sober, you silly little cunt. Nowhere do I state that X was "more detrimental" to me at all. Nor was a comparison made except extremely tenuously between grass and booze. I simply gave an "opinion" that XTC had "The Greatest Potential" for harm, all arguments considered.
I am also the Least "malleable" person you have ever met, babe... And even harder to insult than I am to control. But you've really piqued my interest here... give us a baseline so we can discover just how "Grown Up" you think you are exactly. I'm 49, married, with 2 children, one right in the fucking danger zone at 14. Show me yours now :nopenope:
I (and her mom and teachers) got my 21 year old through it fine, without a single platitude, cliche, or bit of rhetoric. But at the end of the day, the threat of the law put a huge dampening effect on the urge to experiment. Tell us, how did all the "education" work out for you, mate?
Moron, indeed...
Also, can you guess the number of deaths in the US or UK from MDMA per year?
I bet it would even shock a simple mind like yours if you read at least some of the government statistics. But no, I guess that would be too much like thinking on your own to go and FIND OUT some information before jumping to ridiculous conclusions and jumping down peoples throats.
Let me ask you something, how do you KNOW that MDMA is dangerous? What studies have you read? How many people do you know personally who have died from MDMA poisoning or even who have been beaten to death by someone on MDMA?
You know what you have been told and don't question it because you have been taught that questioning authority is wrong. Well some of us don't think that way.
I bet it would even shock a simple mind like yours if you read at least some of the government statistics. But no, I guess that would be too much like thinking on your own to go and FIND OUT some information before jumping to ridiculous conclusions and jumping down peoples throats.
Let me ask you something, how do you KNOW that MDMA is dangerous? What studies have you read? How many people do you know personally who have died from MDMA poisoning or even who have been beaten to death by someone on MDMA?
You know what you have been told and don't question it because you have been taught that questioning authority is wrong. Well some of us don't think that way.
Dude you started this by implying I was an idiot for stating a fact.
I don't care how old you are (I am in late 30s by the way), some people never grow up.
And if you can't read I do not take drugs anymore and nor do I agree with exposing children to them. But I think that the average person (read you) should be way more concerned with your children being exposed to Alcohol than MDMA.
I have had several friends over the years die of alcohol related incidents and not one person I know has died of an MDMA related death (I wage that you don't know of one personally either).
And when it comes to smoking, all of my granparents and several of my other relatives died as a direct cause of cigarette smoke.
I know that a personal story has nothing to do with facts, but I personally can see the facts are speaking for themselves.
I don't care how old you are (I am in late 30s by the way), some people never grow up.
And if you can't read I do not take drugs anymore and nor do I agree with exposing children to them. But I think that the average person (read you) should be way more concerned with your children being exposed to Alcohol than MDMA.
I have had several friends over the years die of alcohol related incidents and not one person I know has died of an MDMA related death (I wage that you don't know of one personally either).
And when it comes to smoking, all of my granparents and several of my other relatives died as a direct cause of cigarette smoke.
I know that a personal story has nothing to do with facts, but I personally can see the facts are speaking for themselves.