This was a thread about delusional Clinton supporters, but FOC shat it up.

[Human Snorenado]

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/08/its_no_longer_just_about_hilla.html

Every member has her own plans for November, including for a few, voting for Obama. Co-founder Amy Siskind, a former Wall Street exec and Clinton fundraiser, told me, "I won't vote for Obama, but I'm not sure what I'll do." Cynthia Ruccia, a Democratic activist from Columbus, Ohio, who twice ran against Republican John Kasich, is supporting McCain -- and organizing other Democrats in her swing state to do likewise.

Way to take the defeat rationally, ladies.  I would make a joke about women not thinking logically, but I don't want you dingbats camped out on my lawn screaming at me.  There was no conspiracy.  There was no robbery.  She lost fair and square.  Get over it and yourselves.

[Guybrush Threepwood]

Kind of like how Nancy Pelosi super-destoryed the chances of a woman ever being Speaker of the House again.

[Tauntaun]

  people mayne

[Mr. Gundam]

I'd like to know where these geniuses stand on the issues.

[Guybrush Threepwood]

I'd like to know where these geniuses stand on the issues.

They don't. They only support(ed) Hillary because she's a woman.

"Nasty Cunts" is what they are called, I believe.

[Human Snorenado]

I'd like to know where these geniuses stand on the issues.

They don't. They only support(ed) Hillary because she's a woman.

"Nasty Cunts" is what they are called, I believe.

Haha, yeah pretty much.  What's funny is they expected black people to fall back in line and support Hillary if she won, but won't do it for Obama.  And if Hillary HAD won, she would have basically stole the election.  Obama got more votes and delegates.  smh.

[TakingBackSunday]

There were a few of these crazies outside the Obama rally in Akron at the end of February.  All of us in line for it were all cool, not really talking politics or anything, not being annoying, and these bitches come up and spew shit how we're supporting the wrong candidate blahblah.

Shuddup beyitch

[laesperanzapaz]

man.

i weep for humanity

[FlameOfCallandor]

Obama, Clinton, or Mccain; it's like flushing the same toilet with a different handle.

[Human Snorenado]

Obama, Clinton, or Mccain; it's like flushing the same toilet with a different handle.

While this is true to an extent, at least in Obama's America there are sewers to carry the shit away.  In Ron Paul's Libertopia, you would have to pay the inevitable singular Corporate Entity that would own everything an exorbitant amount of money just to flush the toilet!  Chamber pots ahoy!

[Olivia Wilde Homo]

So basically all these women who supported a candidate only because she has a vagina, is now trying to move people to become Republicans, a nominee who is a white man.  Narcissism at its worst I guess.

Then again, Hillary supporters aren't the shiniest pennies in the fountain.

[Fresh Prince]

It seems to me most of these woman think she only failed because she was a woman when she failed for a whole lot more. It's like why have Siebel as VP when Hillary is already there argument? Maybe because as a woman she brings different attributes to the table.

[Human Snorenado]

It seems to me most of these woman think she only failed because she was a woman when she failed for a whole lot more. It's like why have Siebel as VP when Hillary is already there argument? Maybe because as a woman she brings different attributes to the table.

Haha, most of them are unwilling to admit she failed at all.  They think (I don't like using that word in reference to these people, but oh well) that the nomination was stolen from her by the big bad men.  smh.

[Mr. Gundam]

It seems to me most of these woman think she only failed because she was a woman when she failed for a whole lot more. It's like why have Siebel as VP when Hillary is already there argument? Maybe because as a woman she brings different attributes to the table.

Haha, most of them are unwilling to admit she failed at all.  They think (I don't like using that word in reference to these people, but oh well) that the nomination was stolen from her by the big bad men.  smh.

So let's support the big bad white man! smh

[Brehvolution]

Obama, Clinton, or Mccain; it's like flushing the same toilet with a different handle.

Awesome.

[Beardo]

they all suck

[FlameOfCallandor]

While this is true to an extent, at least in Obama's America there are sewers to carry the shit away. 

Because sewers dont exist outside of socialism.   

  In Ron Paul's Libertopia, you would have to pay the inevitable singular Corporate Entity that would own everything an exorbitant amount of money just to flush the toilet! 

What funny is that you dread a monopoly from some corporate entity (which by the way monopolies go against everything the free market stands for) yet fail to realize this insult of a singular Corporate Entity" exists. It's called the government and you want to give it more power. You HAVE to pay a city owned service for all of our waste whether you want to or not. You have no choice. So really you just owned yourself. 

[duckman2000]

Jävla fittstim

[Mandark]

Overblown.

There are a few crazies who deeply internalized the Obama vs. Clinton struggle and can't move on.  Plus there are legit gripes about the way Hillary was treated in some parts of the media (especially cable news) which some of her supporters unfairly attributed to Obama's campaign.

But Obama's thumping McCain among women and all the middle aged white feminists I know in real life and online are seriously invested in beating McCain.

Edwards 2016!

[Flannel Boy]

While this is true to an extent, at least in Obama's America there are sewers to carry the shit away. 

Because sewers dont exist outside of socialism.  

  In Ron Paul's Libertopia, you would have to pay the inevitable singular Corporate Entity that would own everything an exorbitant amount of money just to flush the toilet! 

What funny is that you dread a monopoly from some corporate entity (which by the way monopolies go against everything the free market stands for) yet fail to realize this insult of a singular Corporate Entity" exists. It's called the government and you want to give it more power. You HAVE to pay a city owned service for all of our waste whether you want to or not. You have no choice. So really you just owned yourself. 

FoC, the only alternative to government monopolies of water utilities is government-granted monopolies, which haven't worked out well in Argentina, for example. Water and wastewater infrastructures need to be shared and the costs need to be shared as well. 

Overblown.

Yeah, otherwise McCain would be doing much better.

[FlameOfCallandor]

FoC, the only alternative to government monopolies of water utilities is government-granted monopolies, which haven't worked out well in Argentina, for example. Water and wastewater infrastructures need to be shared and the costs need to be shared as well. 

I understand. I was jut point out his hilarious hypocrisy of being afraid of an "evil" monopolistic corporation when we have a monopolistic government doing the same damn thing.

[Mandark]

Except that the government monopoly isn't driven by the profit motive and in a democracy there's some mechanism to make them responsible to the consumers.  As flawed as it might be you don't have either of those things in an unregulated private monopoly.

[FlameOfCallandor]

Except that the government monopoly isn't driven by the profit motive

Sure it is. Corruption, back room deals, bureaucracy bullshit; All that makes government extremely ineffective an almost everything. How many lame ass articles have I seen on Digg that say that Mccain is being manipulated by the evil corporations for bigger profits.

and in a democracy there's some mechanism to make them responsible to the consumers.

Yeah we get to vote every 4 years. Where as in a  free market your voting ballet is your wallet which you use every day. If you dont like a company then you change to a better one. Dont like a government? Then what? Oh you can petition and support lobbies but thats is a very slow process and most of the time stacked heavily against the individual.

As flawed as it might be you don't have either of those things in an unregulated private monopoly.

 And I am against any monopolies to began with. I was supporting what Triumph said I was. I was merely pointing out the hypocrisy of his shitty statement.

[Mandark]

Where as in a  free market your voting ballet is your wallet which you use every day. If you dont like a company then you change to a better one.

Which you couldn't do if the company had a monopoly on a vital resource.

[FlameOfCallandor]

Where as in a  free market your voting ballet is your wallet which you use every day. If you dont like a company then you change to a better one.

Which you couldn't do if the company had a monopoly on a vital resource.

:facepalm


What dont you understand about.

Monopolies are not a free market.

Monopolies are not a free market.

Monopolies are not a free market.

Monopolies are not a free market.

[Positive Touch]

there he goes again

[Fresh Prince]

Monopolies occur in free markets 

[FlameOfCallandor]

Monopolies occur in free markets 

In a free market anyone can challenge the monopoly by providing a better product or service...
In a government provided service you have very little to no way of challenging them. "Oh dont like the long wait at the DMV? Next."

[Fresh Prince]

Except in the late 1800's when Rockefeller had a near monopoly on kerosene oil thanks to the free market until the evil government placed anti-trust laws to encourage competition.

[FlameOfCallandor]

Whether the breakup of Standard Oil was beneficial is a matter of some controversy. Many economists agree that Standard Oil was not a monopoly, citing its much reduced market presence by the time of the antitrust trial. They also argue that the intense free market competition resulted in cheaper oil prices and more diverse petroleum products for consumers.

 Standard's market share fell gradually to 64% by 1911. It did not try to monopolize the exploration and pumping of oil (its share in 1911 was 11%).

There is no doubt that Standard Oil had a huge market share through the use of shady deals but by the time the Sherman Anti Trust act came around. Many other independent oil companies were emerging.

Also a few neat tidbits of information.


"Rockefeller owned a quarter of the shares of the resultant companies, and those share values mostly doubled, he emerged from the dissolution as the richest man in the world."
"The price of Kerosine dropped more than 50% during Standard Oils heyday."

[Fresh Prince]

So wait are you now endorising monopolies because they have cheaper prices?

[radioheadrule83]

I don't think the women who fought for sufferage back in the day quite realised how distinguished mentally-challenged some of their female ancestors would be. Perhaps if they had, my family would have a maid that would put out for the men of the house. Tis a shame.

[Flannel Boy]

Whether the breakup of Standard Oil was beneficial is a matter of some controversy. Many economists agree that Standard Oil was not a monopoly, citing its much reduced market presence by the time of the antitrust trial. They also argue that the intense free market competition resulted in cheaper oil prices and more diverse petroleum products for consumers.

 Standard's market share fell gradually to 64% by 1911. It did not try to monopolize the exploration and pumping of oil (its share in 1911 was 11%).

There is no doubt that Standard Oil had a huge market share through the use of shady deals but by the time the Sherman Anti Trust act came around. Many other independent oil companies were emerging.

Also a few neat tidbits of information.


"Rockefeller owned a quarter of the shares of the resultant companies, and those share values mostly doubled, he emerged from the dissolution as the richest man in the world."
"The price of Kerosine dropped more than 50% during Standard Oils heyday."

If you're going to quote a Wikipedia article, use quotation marks and provide a link.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Oil

edit: beaten by Genghis Cohen

"Monopolies are not a free market."

Yes, but water utilities around the world are either government monopolies or government granted monopolies, where single corporations run or manage the water utilities.I have a hard time imagining how competing corporations would build multiple sewer systems in a single neighborhood in minarchist or anarchist society and compete for costumers. Somehow they'd form defacto monopolies because the infrastructure is so fucking expensive.

[Eric P]

I have a hard time imagining how competing corporations would build multiple sewer systems in a single neighborhood in minarchist or anarchist society and compete for costumers.

and that's why you're not a multibillion dollar sewage magnate but instead some dude on a forum

[Olivia Wilde Homo]

As a Civil Engineering student who has worked and visited several wastewater treatment facilities, the idea of multiple sewage systems is so mind numbingly distinguished mentally-challenged that only a Randroid or someone who goes to school on a short bus would think it was a decent idea.

[Van Cruncheon]

this is what happens when dogma overrules common sense, folks

[Human Snorenado]

this is what happens when dogma overrules common sense, folks

PROOF

[etiolate]

FoC, we're not a free market anymore.  We're a herd market. The consumer no longer dictates what succeeds and what fails, the modern consumer just plain consumes without much question.

[Human Snorenado]

FoC, we're not a free market anymore.  We're a herd market. The consumer no longer dictates what succeeds and what fails, the modern consumer just plain consumes without much question.

Exhibit A:  Nintendo Wii

[Olivia Wilde Homo]

We were never a free market in the first place.  Even Adam Smith himself advocated a degree of intervention.

You will never see a true free market because nothing is ever cut and dry.  It isn't a simple matter of "voting with your wallet."  If the building shuts down and is abandoned (re: Detroit), then it is still a problem.  Not to mention the potential environmental damages that might have been caused that simply just don't re-appear because you voted with your wallet by picking Company B instead of Company A.

The reason why a competitive sewer system won't work is because there is only so much you can do underground.  You can't just have 10 companies lay down sewer piping because it wouldn't work, because there is only so much room.  Besides, how would you switch competition?  Tell a company to rip their pipe from your residence?  Doesn't work that way, not to mention out the fucking ass expensive.  The only way that a competitive sewage system would work is if a household bought and installed their own sewage piping and then called up a business to hook it up from underground, which again, is expensive.  We won't even get into the treatment of the sewage itself.

[radioheadrule83]

FoC, we're not a free market anymore.  We're a herd market. The consumer no longer dictates what succeeds and what fails, the modern consumer just plain consumes without much question.

Some people are sheep yes, but that's always been the case, and its not always a bad strategy. The information age just gives people the means to be more aware and attuned to the hype and fervor generated by the rest of the herd.

[cubicle47b]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_electricity_crisis

Free market.

[etiolate]

FoC, we're not a free market anymore.  We're a herd market. The consumer no longer dictates what succeeds and what fails, the modern consumer just plain consumes without much question.

Exhibit A:  Nintendo Wii

Actually the market was waiting there for years and Nintendo was first to answer the call. What follows now may be the actual exhibit you are looking for.

Ideally, there is the creator and the audience that is responsible for the quality and success of a product. In modern culture, these two entities rise to the top only briefly and are soon drowned out, then replaced by the corporation/producer element.

In the Wii example, the consumer entity existed first, which any research on an individual's part will tell you. It wasn't that a group like women naturally hated videogames, but that they were excluded from the focus of videogames and barely existed in the development world or media. Eventually some company was going to realize this and use it, it just happened to be Nintendo. Part of the reason it may have been Nintendo, because they really hadn't been marketing savvy in the recent past, was because of their creators within the company that were willing to try new things. So the creator entity came second, and it was a creator with a history of quality.

What happened post-Wii success was the glutton of shovelware that tried to cash in, which has made basically a handshake towards a new audience into a greed focused molestation of that audience. The consumer is not being informed, the consumer is kept dumb about game quality and it is no good for the Wii market. So, potentially the Wii can be an exhibit, but it also an example of how things should be, with consumers being heard and creators creating. Honestly, at this point anything will end up an exhibit until the consumer culture is changed.

Looking at PC Gaming, all you have is the same stuff being regurgitated, without creators creating or daring, and a consumer that just doesn't question at all. So you get narrower and narrower selection, and repackaged goods.

[FlameOfCallandor]

FoC, we're not a free market anymore.  We're a herd market. The consumer no longer dictates what succeeds and what fails, the modern consumer just plain consumes without much question.

So what you are saying is that people aren't responsible for themselves?

[FlameOfCallandor]

I originally didn't want to argue for or against anything other than the shitty presidential candidates we have. I only wanted to point out Triumph's hilarious hypocrisy.

[Van Cruncheon]

FoC, we're not a free market anymore.  We're a herd market. The consumer no longer dictates what succeeds and what fails, the modern consumer just plain consumes without much question.

So what you are saying is that people aren't responsible for themselves?

when have people ever been responsible for themselves? what about "no man is an island" is so difficult to grasp?

oh, i am going to regret taking you seriously again, aren't i

yes i am

[Rman]

Oh, FOC.  You provide endless amusement.  I always wonder how FOC is IRL.

[FlameOfCallandor]

Oh, FOC.  You provide endless amusement.  I always wonder how FOC is IRL.

You can ask olimario or EBW.

Then have people ever been responsible for themselves?

If im not responsible for myself, then who is responsible for me?

[Van Cruncheon]

take a guess

[Crushed]

Oh, FOC.  You provide endless amusement.  I always wonder how FOC is IRL.

"OH, MY VALVE! THESE SAVAGES! THESE SODOMITES!"

[FlameOfCallandor]

take a guess

Society? Then all my libertarian ranting is society's fault. You can blame yourself for me.

Sucks to be you knowing that you are responsible for me, doesnt it. 

[Van Cruncheon]

i am taking responsibility for you by trying to educate you

[Mandark]

Despite etiolate's transparent attempt to goad me into arguing with him I will continue to focus my e-ire on FoC.

:facepalm


What dont you understand about.

Monopolies are not a free market.

Monopolies are not a free market.

Monopolies occur in free markets 

In a free market anyone can challenge the monopoly by providing a better product or service...
In a government provided service you have very little to no way of challenging them. "Oh dont like the long wait at the DMV? Next."

Not anyone.  Just those with access to the capital, material, and labor required.

If someone monopolizes a natural resource which can not be mass-produced it would be impossible to challenge them.  If Malek's company United Polack owned all the water, how would you create a competing sewage system?

The free market is a way of distributing resources and encouraging their development which can sometimes be very efficient.  But it can not change fundamental facts about scarcity.  It is not magic.

[FlameOfCallandor]

i am taking responsibility for you by trying to educate you

And if I refuse are you still responsible for my act of refusing?

[Van Cruncheon]

society is not just you and me

[FlameOfCallandor]

society is not just you and me

Sounds like your passing the buck. Gee that sure is easy to do when no one is responsible for themselves or anything at all.

[Mandark]

See now I'm just feeling ignored.

[Flannel Boy]

If someone monopolizes a natural resource which can not be mass-produced it would be impossible to challenge them.  If Malek's company United Polack owned all the water, how would you create a competing sewage system?

The free market is a way of distributing resources and encouraging their development which can sometimes be very efficient.  But it can not change fundamental facts about scarcity.  It is not magic.

United Polak: we provide you with warm water and cold vodka. What's not to like?

(our costs possibly. because we're a monopoly, we can do as we please)

FoC, how would natural resources be managed in a minimalist dreamworld? If I mixed my labor with Lake Ontario, would Lake Ontario be mine?

[Mandark]

I'm not drinking anything that Malek "mixed his labor" with, monopoly or no.

[Fresh Prince]

Sometimes I wonder is FoC even steps out of his house and interacts with the world outside it.