Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Water SupplyFollow

#52 Jul 02 2014 at 7:27 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
28,224 posts
Jophiel wrote:
TirithRR wrote:
So what exactly did to spend the extra 20 dollars a month on?

Crack cocaine, iPhones, Air Jordans and those color televisions that I've been hearing poor people have. Also, a 150lb sack of lentils so they can make a 55 gal drum of soup and feed a family of six for 12¢ a day.



Joke's on them. They won't be makin' much soup without water. Stoopid poors.
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#53 Jul 02 2014 at 7:29 PM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
14,841 posts
Samira wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
TirithRR wrote:
So what exactly did to spend the extra 20 dollars a month on?

Crack cocaine, iPhones, Air Jordans and those color televisions that I've been hearing poor people have. Also, a 150lb sack of lentils so they can make a 55 gal drum of soup and feed a family of six for 12¢ a day.



Joke's on them. They won't be makin' much soup without water. Stoopid poors.


In that case they'd just have to put a barrel under the gutter. Problem solved.

Just keep it out in the sun long enough to heat it up and sterilize it. I'm sure that works.
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#54 Jul 02 2014 at 8:58 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
11,746 posts
Well the **** is going on here? Smiley: confused

TirithRR wrote:
Is it made worse because guy #2 gets to pretend he's better off than guy #1 for 2 months out of the quarter, until it catches up with him and he realizes he's just as @#%^ed as guy #1?
Basically. He's living the high life squandering away the money on expensive indulgences, you know like snickers bars and stuff, then when the time comes to pay the tab he's screwed because he didn't plan properly and is less likely to scrounge up the money he needs in time.
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#55 Jul 02 2014 at 9:28 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Samira wrote:
Joke's on them. They won't be makin' much soup without water. Stoopid poors.

Just gotta bring your lentils down to the public park, yo.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#56 Jul 02 2014 at 9:58 PM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
14,841 posts
someproteinguy wrote:
Well the **** is going on here? Smiley: confused

TirithRR wrote:
Is it made worse because guy #2 gets to pretend he's better off than guy #1 for 2 months out of the quarter, until it catches up with him and he realizes he's just as @#%^ed as guy #1?
Basically. He's living the high life squandering away the money on expensive indulgences, you know like snickers bars and stuff, then when the time comes to pay the tab he's screwed because he didn't plan properly and is less likely to scrounge up the money he needs in time.


All joking and exaggeration aside, it is pretty much the only difference between him and guy #1. The difference between the two is just what they decide to do with that 20 dollars per month that each of them has to pay. One is forced to pay it every month (well, not forced, he could chose not to pay it as well and spend the money elsewhere). The other is given the choice to spend it elsewhere instead and only "forced" to pay it after 3 months. Both of them may have needs for that money elsewhere, but the difference between the two options is only in their minds.
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#57 Jul 03 2014 at 12:55 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
11,746 posts
Well yeah, of course it it's in their minds, that was the whole point. Smiley: motz

Edited, Jul 2nd 2014 11:56pm by someproteinguy
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#58 Jul 03 2014 at 1:33 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
11,954 posts
Yes, some "people" believe that budgeting and finances are magic, so they just spend all the money they have on hand.

Whenever they get an "unexpected" expense, they can't pay for it, and have to solve the problem in a jacked up way.
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#59 Jul 03 2014 at 7:02 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Timelordwho wrote:
Yes, some "people" believe that budgeting and finances are magic, so they just spend all the money they have on hand.

Budgeting and money management are skills that poor people often lack. This isn't why they're poor but rather when every expenditure is an emergency, you learn to just spend the money as soon as you get it because it's going to immediately disappear anyway.

A lot of better off people lack the same skills, of course. They just run up big credit card bills and debt or else make enough to absorb their paycheck to paycheck spending.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#60 Jul 03 2014 at 8:18 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
******
27,449 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Timelordwho wrote:
Yes, some "people" believe that budgeting and finances are magic, so they just spend all the money they have on hand.

Budgeting and money management are skills that poor people often lack. This isn't why they're poor but rather when every expenditure is an emergency, you learn to just spend the money as soon as you get it because it's going to immediately disappear anyway.

A lot of better off people lack the same skills, of course. They just run up big credit card bills and debt or else make enough to absorb their paycheck to paycheck spending.

If you're anything like my relatives, you just let the water bill get bad enough to get shut off and then open a new account in one of your kids' names. Sure, if they shut if off every six months you'll run out of kids to use in like four years, but that's okay. That's four years from now's problem.

Edited, Jul 3rd 2014 8:19am by Poldaran
____________________________
Someone on another forum wrote:
Wow, you've got an awesome writing style.! I really dig the narrator's back story, humor, sarcasm, and the plethora of pop culture references. Altogether a refreshingly different RotR journal (not that I don't like the more traditional ones, mind you).

#61 Jul 03 2014 at 12:50 PM Rating: Good
******
27,272 posts
Sounds like they're lovely people.
____________________________
Theophany wrote:
YOU'RE AN ELITIST @#%^ AETHIEN, NO WONDER YOU HAVE NO FRIENDS AND PEOPLE HATE YOU.
someproteinguy wrote:
Aethien you take more terrible pictures than a Japanese tourist.
Astarin wrote:
One day, Maz, you'll learn not to click on anything Aeth links.
#62 Jul 03 2014 at 12:54 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Well-hydrated, too.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#63 Jul 03 2014 at 12:59 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
11,746 posts
Pity they couldn't finagle things a bit and stretch that out a couple of more months. A touch more effort and you could put off paying indefinitely.
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#64 Jul 03 2014 at 2:24 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,572 posts
Tirith, it's basically the same reason why people can manage to pay $49.99/month for 12 months to finance a TV, but can't save up $500 for the same, even though the latter would save the money. While Joph may joke about people being poor because of dumb financial decisions, um... people do actually make really really dumb financial decisions. All the time. And not just the poor. It just hurts the poor more because they have far less buffer to work with.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#65 Jul 03 2014 at 2:50 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
While Joph may joke about people being poor because of dumb financial decisions, um... people do actually make really really dumb financial decisions. All the time. And not just the poor. It just hurts the poor more because they have far less buffer to work with.

Post #59 Smiley: thumbsup
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#66 Jul 03 2014 at 2:52 PM Rating: Excellent
That doesn't increase your wordcount joph!
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#67 Jul 03 2014 at 3:29 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,572 posts
Jophiel wrote:
gbaji wrote:
While Joph may joke about people being poor because of dumb financial decisions, um... people do actually make really really dumb financial decisions. All the time. And not just the poor. It just hurts the poor more because they have far less buffer to work with.

Post #59 Smiley: thumbsup


Yeah yeah yeah. Was still reading the previous page. So gold star for you then!
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#68 Jul 03 2014 at 4:11 PM Rating: Excellent
Lunatic
******
29,326 posts
While Joph may joke about people being poor because of dumb financial decisions, um... people do actually make really really dumb financial decisions. All the time

So you'd say they act irrationally and need to be protected via regulation because people can't be relied upon to make good decisions and allow market forces to provide the best outcomes?

WELCOME ABOARD, COMRADE!

Glad to see you come around. Or did you forget in your "I'm smarter than idiots!" glory post that your ENTIRE political philosophy relies on the opposite of what you just stated? That people will make good decisions and the market will drive bad options out and enrich everyone efficiently?

Just kidding, you never understood that, huh?
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a whore. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#69 Jul 03 2014 at 4:35 PM Rating: Good
Supreme Lionator
*****
14,174 posts
Welcome to the losing side, ☭baji.
____________________________
“Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.”
#70 Jul 03 2014 at 6:18 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,572 posts
Smasharoo wrote:
While Joph may joke about people being poor because of dumb financial decisions, um... people do actually make really really dumb financial decisions. All the time

So you'd say they act irrationally and need to be protected via regulation...


Nope. People act irrationally, and it's their right to do so if they want. We can attempt to teach people how to make good rational decisions, but it's not our job to force them to do so. Liberty somewhat requires that people be free to make poor decisions.


Quote:
... because people can't be relied upon to make good decisions and allow market forces to provide the best outcomes?


Market forces will respond to any action people make. It's not about "best outcomes", it's about "correct outcomes". If you allow the market to react to people's decisions, then poor decisions will (usually) result in poor outcomes, which in turn acts as a natural deterrent to making poor decisions. If you attempt to correct for those market outcomes, then you reduce the odds that people will learn from their mistakes. They'll keep making poor decisions and statistically suffer even more over time.

In other words, if people can't pay their water bills because they decide to spend money on other things instead, then that's their choice. We have to let them suffer the consequences. Attempting to protect them from this will hurt them in the long run. Yes. Harsh world. Fair world is more important.


Quote:
Glad to see you come around. Or did you forget in your "I'm smarter than idiots!" glory post that your ENTIRE political philosophy relies on the opposite of what you just stated?


Um... It rests on the opposite of what *you* just stated.

Quote:
That people will make good decisions and the market will drive bad options out and enrich everyone efficiently?


It's not the markets job to drive out bad options or to enrich everyone efficiently. The fact that you think this (or pretend to think this) is your problem, not mine. I'm under no illusions that the market does anything more than respond fairly and correctly to what people do. I happen to *also* believe that if you allow this response, that it gives people the best environment in which to make the best decisions possible and maximizes the odds that they'll experience good outcomes. But by no means does the market guarantee that, nor is it correct to claim that a negative market outcome is some kind of failure of the market itself.

Edited, Jul 3rd 2014 5:19pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#71 Jul 03 2014 at 6:21 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
29,326 posts

Market forces will respond to any action people make. It's not about "best outcomes", it's about "correct outcomes". If you allow the market to react to people's decisions, then poor decisions will result in poor outcomes, which in turn acts as a natural deterrent to making poor decisions


Really?

How? How does that mechanism work, exactly. How does someone making a bad decision prevent them from making bad decisions, because I heard that they do it "all the time" so apparently you've contradicted yourself again. It can't be both, sadly :(. Which time were you wrong, would you say? I mean I know you're making it up each post, obviously, there's been no thought put into it all, you aren't capable of that, but explain to me how the deterrent failed with people who make these mistakes "all the time"?

I'm just kidding, don't. I'm just going to laugh about you cornering yourself so deftly with virtually no effort on my part.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a whore. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#72 Jul 03 2014 at 6:54 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
11,954 posts
Quote:
It's not the markets job to drive out bad options or to enrich everyone efficiently. The fact that you think this (or pretend to think this) is your problem, not mine. I'm under no illusions that the market does anything more than respond fairly and correctly to what people do. I happen to *also* believe that if you allow this response, that it gives people the best environment in which to make the best decisions possible and maximizes the odds that they'll experience good outcomes. But by no means does the market guarantee that, nor is it correct to claim that a negative market outcome is some kind of failure of the market itself.


Exactly. It's not the market's job to do those things. It's some other entities job, some entity which can cause the markets to adjust their behavior.
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#73 Jul 03 2014 at 7:33 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,572 posts
Smasharoo wrote:

Market forces will respond to any action people make. It's not about "best outcomes", it's about "correct outcomes". If you allow the market to react to people's decisions, then poor decisions will result in poor outcomes, which in turn acts as a natural deterrent to making poor decisions


Really?

How? How does that mechanism work, exactly. How does someone making a bad decision prevent them from making bad decisions...


It doesn't. Nothing "prevents" them from doing anything. What part of "freedom to make poor choices" do you not understand?

It does, as I clearly stated in the portion of my post which you quoted, act as a deterrent to making poor decisions. Which is not the same thing as preventing them from making poor decisions. See. Cause in my world we should allow people to have all the information they need and then grant them the freedom to make their own decisions, and in your world you force them to do what you think is best for them.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#74 Jul 03 2014 at 7:42 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,572 posts
Timelordwho wrote:
Quote:
It's not the markets job to drive out bad options or to enrich everyone efficiently. The fact that you think this (or pretend to think this) is your problem, not mine. I'm under no illusions that the market does anything more than respond fairly and correctly to what people do. I happen to *also* believe that if you allow this response, that it gives people the best environment in which to make the best decisions possible and maximizes the odds that they'll experience good outcomes. But by no means does the market guarantee that, nor is it correct to claim that a negative market outcome is some kind of failure of the market itself.


Exactly. It's not the market's job to do those things. It's some other entities job, some entity which can cause the markets to adjust their behavior.


Sure. And if you want to live in an authoritarian regime, then it is absolutely the job of the government to tell you what to do. The question is whether that's what we actually want. And the larger point is to make sure that people are aware that this is the choice they are making. Do we want a government that is empowered to make those choices for us? Because the consequence of having freedom is that some percentage of the population will *always* make bad choices. They'll blow their money on hookers and booze instead of putting food on the table, or they'll waste their money on a "sure thing" and lose, or they'll drop out of school to spend more time with their buddies and end out (hahaha!) in and out of prison for the next ten years.

Does the cost of those failures justify the loss of freedom that would be required to prevent them? I don't think so. Thus, preventing those outcomes is something that we should not do. We have to let people suffer the consequences of their actions because anything else ultimately infringes the freedom of us all. Yes, that can be harsh. But, as I said earlier, it is fair.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#75 Jul 03 2014 at 8:06 PM Rating: Excellent
gbaji wrote:
Cause in my world we should allow people to have all the information they need and then grant them the freedom to make their own decisions,
ITT: gbaji advocates for free post-secondary education.

gbaji wrote:
Because the consequence of having freedom is that some percentage of the population will *always* make bad choices.
also: Abortion
____________________________
Allegory wrote:
Bijou your art is exceptionally creepy. It seems like their should be something menacing about it, yet no such tone is present.
#76 Jul 03 2014 at 8:13 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,572 posts
Friar Bijou wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Cause in my world we should allow people to have all the information they need and then grant them the freedom to make their own decisions,
ITT: gbaji advocates for free post-secondary education.


Allowing and providing are two different things.

Quote:
gbaji wrote:
Because the consequence of having freedom is that some percentage of the population will *always* make bad choices.
also: Abortion


What about abortion?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#77 Jul 03 2014 at 8:14 PM Rating: Excellent
******
43,650 posts
Friar Bijou wrote:
also: Abortion
He's always been okay with abortion, what he's against is the use of money to pay for lightbulbs in clinics that exist in buildings that may have possibly could have performed an abortion somewhere within. Maybe.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#78 Jul 03 2014 at 8:18 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
11,954 posts
Quote:
Market forces will respond to any action people make. It's not about "best outcomes", it's about "correct outcomes". If you allow the market to react to people's decisions, then poor decisions will result in poor outcomes, which in turn acts as a natural deterrent to making poor decisions


No, 'market forces' are very good at getting the market to prey upon people who make bad decisions. You have three solutions to this. You can either decide that is fine, or you can restrict the actions of the market in some way to prevent that, or restrict the actions of the poor decision makers.
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#79 Jul 03 2014 at 8:29 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,572 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Friar Bijou wrote:
also: Abortion
He's always been okay with abortion, what he's against is the use of money to pay for lightbulbs in clinics that exist in buildings that may have possibly could have performed an abortion somewhere within. Maybe.


I'm pretty consistent with my position that public money should not be spent on something merely because we think it's ok for it to be legal. That and I have this strange idea that we should not use the power of the government to intentionally take actions designed to violate the beliefs of others, even if we don't share those beliefs. Let's be honest here. If there weren't a bunch of people opposed to abortion on religious grounds, there would be close to zero support for political actions involving funding for say planned parenthood.

That political push exists *because* the other "side" will oppose it, and there's value in highlighting the conflict. The sooner people realize that most of the political issues they're told to focus on are of this sort, the sooner they can look past the BS and see the actual issues going on around them. It's not about abortion. It's not about **** marriage. It's not about health care.

The political battle of our age is about the role of government in our lives. Period. It's the same battle that we've been fighting for the last century (more or less). In the US, this is specifically a fight between social liberalism and classical liberalism. All of those other political conflicts are just window dressing, in most cases designed to push the social liberalism agenda forward without people realizing that this is the cause they are really supporting. It's why, in every one of these issue, I always attempt to tie it back to the one thing they all have in common: The need for a more authoritarian government to "solve" the problem at hand.

That "solution" is the objective. All those political issues? Just means to that end.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#80 Jul 03 2014 at 8:33 PM Rating: Excellent
******
43,650 posts
gbaji wrote:
I'm pretty consistent with my position
That consistency being "Anything vaguely Democrat bad."
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#81 Jul 03 2014 at 8:37 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,572 posts
Timelordwho wrote:
Quote:
Market forces will respond to any action people make. It's not about "best outcomes", it's about "correct outcomes". If you allow the market to react to people's decisions, then poor decisions will result in poor outcomes, which in turn acts as a natural deterrent to making poor decisions


No, 'market forces' are very good at getting the market to prey upon people who make bad decisions.


That's kind of a circular statement though. The Market forces *are* what punish people who make bad decisions. You choose to spend your money on booze instead of paying the water bill and you have your water shut off and have to carry water to your home instead of having it come right out of the tap. The word "prey" implies some kind of malevolence, but that's simply not the case here. This is about natural consequences. You put your hand in the fire. It burns you. The fire didn't "prey" on you. It did what fire does. It's up to you to learn the lesson and not make the same mistake next time.

Quote:
You have three solutions to this. You can either decide that is fine, or you can restrict the actions of the market in some way to prevent that, or restrict the actions of the poor decision makers.


In most cases, we should decide that it's fine. On very rare occasions, we can restrict the actions of the market (really the players of the market). Under more or less zero cases should we restrict the actions of the poor decision makers though. Other than actions which are illegal (which should be illegal because of the effect on others, not the potential for poor consequences to you), you should be free to take any action at all and suffer the consequences or reap the benefits thereof. To do otherwise represents an undo infringement on our liberty.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#82 Jul 03 2014 at 8:41 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,572 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
gbaji wrote:
I'm pretty consistent with my position
That consistency being "Anything vaguely Democrat bad."


In exact proportion to the degree to which Democratic party policies conflict with my own ideology, yes. Why is that surprising? I'm not a Republican because I picked a party out of a hat, you know.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#83 Jul 03 2014 at 8:43 PM Rating: Excellent
******
43,650 posts
gbaji wrote:
I'm not a Republican because I picked a party out of a hat, you know.
Of course you didn't randomly pick a party. You picked it because you noticed this site was mostly Democratic and you've got a severe attention seeking personality.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#84 Jul 03 2014 at 8:50 PM Rating: Excellent
Quote:
The fire didn't "prey" on you. It did what fire does. It's up to you to learn the lesson and not make the same mistake next time.
Market forces look for people who have a tendency to stick their hand into a fire, and then do everything they can to both encourage this behavior and profit from that. This is preying, and is certainly one of the things the market does. There is a huge amount of profit in exploiting the behavior of stupid people.
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#85 Jul 03 2014 at 8:55 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,572 posts
Oh. And let me reiterate TLW, that by allowing those market forces to negatively effect those who make poor decisions, it will logically decrease the number of people who make those poor decisions. There will always be some who do, anyway, but it's reasonable to assume that everything else being the same, if you reduce or eliminate the negative consequences for poor choices, people will make poor choices more often. What people often forget is that at the time of the choice, the person making that poor choice had some reason for making it. At that moment, buying that bottle of booze right in front of him was more important than setting that money aside to pay the water bill (for example).

The mistake people make when looking at choices is that they assume that someone must choose to have the negative consequence affect them, and since that's silly, it must not really have been a choice at all. They had no choice. It was inevitable. Whatever. But that's not how poor choices happen. Usually people choose something "good" that's right in front of them, and either ignore the potential negative consequences, or just hope that somehow something will intervene to prevent anything bad from happening. No one plans to get arrested for robbing a store, for example. But they do choose to commit the robbery. In most cases, they just hope/assume they wont get caught.

The point being that anything which minimizes the awareness of consequences (or perceived probability of those consequences occurring) will affect that choice. If, for example, the would be robber knew that there was a 100% chance that he'd get caught, he would be far less likely to try to commit the crime than if he believed there was a good chance he'd get away with it. So for that reason, acting to reduce or eliminate the consequences of poor choices will absolutely increase the rate at which they will be made. It can't *not* do so.

So unless you actually believe that 100% of all those people who failed to pay their water bills did so because they had absolutely zero dollars at all, and no choices about what to spend those dollars on, and thus had no possibility to pay that bill instead of spending the money on something else, then all we're doing by "helping" them, is enabling them in their poor choices. Are there certainly *some* people who are so poor they can't pay the water bill no matter how well they make their choices? Sure. But those people presumably also require more help than just with their water bills, so maybe that's a whole separate issue we should address. Most of those people made choices. And they should have to deal with the consequences of those choices.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#86 Jul 03 2014 at 9:00 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,572 posts
Sir Xsarus wrote:
Quote:
The fire didn't "prey" on you. It did what fire does. It's up to you to learn the lesson and not make the same mistake next time.
Market forces look for people who have a tendency to stick their hand into a fire, and then do everything they can to both encourage this behavior and profit from that. This is preying, and is certainly one of the things the market does. There is a huge amount of profit in exploiting the behavior of stupid people.


Market forces do nothing of the sort. You're confusing "market forces" with "players in the market". Yes, there are people who operate within the market who may encourage people to make poor choices for their own profit. Those are people though, not forces. That's an entirely different conversation. We could blame the casino for tempting people into gambling away their rent money, but ultimately we still have to blame the people for gambling away their rent money, right?

Again though, that's a whole different issue. The fact that if you don't pay your water bill, you don't get water out of your tap isn't about predatory business practices at all though. You choose not to pay for something. It's unreasonable to then expect to get the thing you didn't pay for, isn't it?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#87 Jul 03 2014 at 9:00 PM Rating: Excellent
******
43,650 posts
gbaji wrote:
Oh. And let me reiterate
Because if you say the same thing multiple times, it gains experience and eventually can digivolve to Ultimate Form.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#88 Jul 03 2014 at 9:03 PM Rating: Excellent
Sure players in the market, the point is that there is a role needed to stop explicitly predatory behavior if it goes over a line, because market forces reward this behavior with profits.
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#89 Jul 04 2014 at 1:10 AM Rating: Good
Lunatic
******
29,326 posts
Oh. And let me reiterate TLW, that by allowing those market forces to negatively effect those who make poor decisions, it will logically decrease the number of people who make those poor decisions.

Please don't ever use the word "logically" again. It took me two hours to stop laughing. Just use "end out" instead. Don't worry about verb tense, you never get it right, anyway.

Of course you didn't randomly pick a party. You picked it because you noticed this site was mostly Democratic and you've got a severe attention seeking personality.

Nah, it's the party of lucky idiots who want to feel they accomplished things with hard work. Also: homophobes ans racists. So, you know, pretty much a lock there for G.

The funniest part of watching him fail in trying to describe how markets work is that without regulation he'd be working for 20 cents a day and explaining how the people who work for 10 cents a day just aren't good enough decision makers. There's literally nothing the guy has done in his life that isn't reliant on government.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a whore. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#90 Jul 04 2014 at 8:06 AM Rating: Good
Supreme Lionator
*****
14,174 posts
Triremelordwho wrote:
Exactly. It's not the market's job to do those things. It's some other entities job, some entity which can cause the markets to adjust their behavior.


Oh, fine. But don't say I never do anything for you.
____________________________
“Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.”
#91 Jul 07 2014 at 6:30 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,572 posts
Sir Xsarus wrote:
Sure players in the market, the point is that there is a role needed to stop explicitly predatory behavior if it goes over a line, because market forces reward this behavior with profits.


Sure. I never said this doesn't exist, nor that regulation shouldn't exist to counter it. But it's not the case here. Unless you're actually arguing that the water service in Detroit is run in some kind of predatory manner? A quick google indicates that they charge about the same for their water/sewer services as other cities, so I'm not sure how this applies. The fact that there are some predatory players in the market out there doesn't change the fact that in this case, with the exception of the rare few (like one of the women highlighted in the article) for whom the billing is a mistake or there's some other odd thing happening with their water, there's nothing nefarious about the city shutting off their water. It's not a violation of their rights. It's not unfair. It's not the result of any sort of predatory practice. It's them choosing not to pay for a service, and therefore not getting that service.


I'm familiar with the concept of a market failure. This isn't one of those though.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#92 Jul 07 2014 at 6:33 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,572 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
gbaji wrote:
I'm not a Republican because I picked a party out of a hat, you know.
Of course you didn't randomly pick a party. You picked it because you noticed this site was mostly Democratic and you've got a severe attention seeking personality.


This site didn't used to be mostly Democratic. That doesn't preclude me staying here because I've got an attention seeking personality, but that wasn't why I started posting here. Smiley: tongue
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#93 Jul 07 2014 at 6:37 PM Rating: Good
gbaji wrote:
I'm not a Republican because I picked a party out of a hat, you know.
You picked the party that aligned with your person views: mysoginist, racist and homophobic.





**** DUH!
____________________________
Allegory wrote:
Bijou your art is exceptionally creepy. It seems like their should be something menacing about it, yet no such tone is present.
#94 Jul 07 2014 at 9:42 PM Rating: Excellent
gbaji wrote:
Sir Xsarus wrote:
Sure players in the market, the point is that there is a role needed to stop explicitly predatory behavior if it goes over a line, because market forces reward this behavior with profits.


Sure. I never said this doesn't exist, nor that regulation shouldn't exist to counter it. But it's not the case here. Unless you're actually arguing that the water service in Detroit is run in some kind of predatory manner? A quick google indicates that they charge about the same for their water/sewer services as other cities, so I'm not sure how this applies. The fact that there are some predatory players in the market out there doesn't change the fact that in this case, with the exception of the rare few (like one of the women highlighted in the article) for whom the billing is a mistake or there's some other odd thing happening with their water, there's nothing nefarious about the city shutting off their water. It's not a violation of their rights. It's not unfair. It's not the result of any sort of predatory practice. It's them choosing not to pay for a service, and therefore not getting that service.


I'm familiar with the concept of a market failure. This isn't one of those though.

I think it's clear the conversation had turned more general, but way to dodge the point.
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#95 Jul 08 2014 at 12:32 AM Rating: Excellent
**
501 posts
It isn't just bad decisions. Poverty isn't just self perpetuating, it grows exponentially. It costs more to be poor.

If you're poor you'll probably have bad credit, which means you'll pay more for a hunk of sh*t car than someone with good credit pays for a nice car.
Because your car is a hunk-o-shibbett, it will break down.. a lot. If you don't know how or can't afford the tools to fix it, you'll have to pay a mechanic.
There goes a huge chunk of what little money you do have, unless you put it on a card, but then again, your poor credit is expensive.
And this is going to keep happening because your car ain't gettin' nothin' but older.


You'll also have to pay more for sh*tty housing ( maybe even a pay by the week dump). This housing will also have crappy insulation so your
utility bills will also be obscene. Eventually something bad will happen and you won't have the funds. At this point you will have to prioritize
and credit cards and medical bills will always come after basic survival (food, clothing, shelter, crack rock).

Now your credit will take even more hits and everything is going to cost you even more.
Poverty is a sucking black hole and it's almost impossible to claw your way out.

My point is, this can happen to you even if you don't make a multitude of poor decisions.
Time and chance happeneth to us all.

Edited, Jul 8th 2014 2:37am by CoalHeart
____________________________
Never regret.To regret is to assume.
#96 Jul 08 2014 at 7:51 AM Rating: Good
******
43,650 posts
gbaji wrote:
but that wasn't why I started posting here.
You started posting on a video game site for reasons other than political contrarianism? That is a world view shifting discovery.
Sir Xsarus wrote:
I think it's clear the conversation had turned more general, but way to dodge the point.
I tried to explain conversation progression once. It went about as well as you'd expect.

Edited, Jul 8th 2014 9:53am by lolgaxe
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#97 Jul 09 2014 at 9:41 AM Rating: Good
Imaginary Friend
*****
15,963 posts
Whether you call it God-given right.. or you call it Natural Law.. Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of happiness..
I think that the "Life" part of that kinda MUST include water.. so to say that access to water isn't a right is just absurd and barbaric.

The entire issue just sheds light on the conflict of interest between people trying to make money and doing what is humane. It certainly would be nice if everyone was on an equal playing field of financial responsibility but that simply isn't the reality.. and we can continue pretending that situations like these are just an anomaly but it isn't. It's the way it actually is.

It's the same argument that I have had countless times with conservatives **** about entitlements.. **** bitch **** hand-outs, welfare, disincentives... and I say "Well what is your answer, then? Let people rot and die in the street?" <crickets>

____________________________
With the receiver in my hand..
#98 Jul 09 2014 at 10:07 AM Rating: Good
******
43,650 posts
You can purify water yourself by boiling it, using purification tablets, or creating a filter of your own with tree bark, charcoal, and sand.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#99 Jul 09 2014 at 10:30 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
11,746 posts
All those sound like science, and we don't allow that kind of deviant behavior in our schools. Smiley: disappointed
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#100 Jul 09 2014 at 10:33 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
I bought my family a 50lb bag of tree bark on sale which allows me to purify water for .02¢ a liter.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#101 Jul 09 2014 at 10:45 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
11,746 posts
Just try steal your neighbor's landscaping. 5 years on and they're still blaming the squirrels.

Edited, Jul 9th 2014 9:45am by someproteinguy
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 39 All times are in CDT
Allegory, Debalic, stupidmonkey, Anonymous Guests (36)