Forum Settings
« Previous 0 Next »
Reply To Thread

War and Peace theory of shopping.

#1 Mar 14 2013 at 8:58 PM Rating: Default
34,040 posts
BeanX the Irrelevant wrote:
WTF did I just read... Gbaji you need your head examined.

Seriously a profit is a profit, you cant say I made less money this year then last year therefore I lost money.

If you made less money because someone else forced you to spend it on something you didn't want to spend it on, yes you can.

Yes the worker is still making a 'profit' every hour hes 20 dollars richer, if he stupidly 'invests' or loses that 10 of money, or some random money eating bug or some weird sh*t shows up and he decides to feed it, that's his fault.

That's not how losses are calculated though. If you pick my pocket while I'm in the lunch line at work, and take $10 from me, even though I earned more than $10 that day at work, I still lost $10. WTF?

But by the end of the day hes still 10 dollars per hour richer then he was before coming into work.

So it's ok to steal any amount of money from someone as long as he has more money at the end of the day than he had at the beginning? So you've just justified employers paying their employees $1 a day, right? Cause that's not a loss relative to their current pay at all since they still are making money.

Please tell me you understand why what you're arguing is ridiculous.

As for your I made less money this year, then last year, therefore unprofitable. Umm not If you make more then it costs to produce you are still making a profit. Just less of a profit then previous years.

I didn't say "unprofitable". Don't put words in my mouth. I said that the dollars forced to be spent that the business didn't want to spend is a loss to the business. If you make me pay $10 for something I don't want to spend money on, I lost that $10. Period. It does not matter that during the same time period that you did that, I earned more than $10. Again, your logic requires claiming that nothing taken from someone is ever a loss as long as there's some time frame we can say their total dollars still increased.

That's a completely unworkable definition of "loss". And one that even the US government (and the IRS) doesn't try to foist on us. If I earn $100k this year, and I invest $10k of it and lose it all in the market, I get to deduct that $10k loss from my income taxes. Why? Because even though I ended up with more money than I started, it still lost that money. You're trying to invent a new definition here.
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
« Previous 0 Next »
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help