DrafterX
6 years ago
Axl wrote that man... 😟
delta1
6 years ago
salt was once used as a form of currency...can you imagine how long transactions will take?

one grain...two grains...three grains...four grains...five grains.......dammit - who opened the window!!!
bgz
  • bgz
  • Herf-A-Holic
6 years ago

Nice Fallout reference.

I was just thinking about getting #4, it's on sale at steam

victor809 wrote:



Nice.

I got the collectors edition with the pip boy when it came out. I think I played it for like 20 minutes.

One of these days when I get more time...
bgz
  • bgz
  • Herf-A-Holic
6 years ago
Read through the rest of this after I posted my last response...

So if I'm understanding Ray Ray logic.

* If you don't believe in Jesus, then you're a progressive, anti-moral liberal.
* We should go back to gold and silver because depressions are better.
* And he has a secret atheist rape fetish (I'm sure that was in there somewhere, too lazy to scroll up).
RayR
6 years ago

Progressivism is a political philosophy in support of social reform.[1] Based on the idea of progress in which advancements in science, technology, economic development and social organization are vital to the improvement of the human condition, progressivism became highly significant during the Age of Enlightenment in Europe, out of the belief that Europe was demonstrating that societies could progress in civility from uncivilized conditions to civilization through strengthening the basis of empirical knowledge as the foundation of society.[2] Figures of the Enlightenment believed that progress had universal application to all societies and that these ideas would spread across the world from Europe.[2]

The contemporary common political conception of progressivism emerged from the vast social changes brought about by industrialization in the Western world in the late-19th century. Progressives take the view that progress is being stifled by vast economic inequality between the rich and the poor; minimally regulated laissez-faire capitalism with monopolistic corporations; and the intense and often violent conflict between capitalists and workers, arguing that measures were needed to address these problems.[3]

The meanings of progressivism have varied over time and from different perspectives. Early-20th century progressivism was tied to eugenics and the temperance movement, both of which were promoted in the name of public health and as initiatives toward that goal.[4][5][6][7][8] Contemporary progressives promote public policies that they believe will lead to positive social change. In the 21st century, a movement that identifies as progressive is "a social or political movement that aims to represent the interests of ordinary people through political change and the support of government actions".[9]

I think this is an accurate depiction of progressivism. Some parts of it at one time were evil or nonsensical. For the most part it is about enlightenment and positive social reform.

But go on spouting your nonsense. That is one greatness of America. Everyone has the right to free speech. Just because you seem yourself logical doesn't mean you are correct. Anyone can find published morons or video/audio morons who support their viewpoint. So far you haven't provided a cogent viewpoint.

Speyside wrote:



You give me the Wikipedia introduction to what is Progressivism? Progressivism is all "about enlightenment and positive social reform"??? Unicorns and rainbows and free lollypops for all the proles too and I guess?
Or did the promises of Progressivism as all Utopian movements do that claim "to represent the interests of ordinary people through political change and the support of government actions" (that's what every collectivist movement and dictator says too BTW), actually lead to a decent into the warfare-welfare state and its not so positive social reforms.
I prefer serious investigations into history, political movements, their origins and their legacy. Wikipedia is not a go-to place for such things. So I give you a book to read if you'd like, it's FREE too, and a million times more enlightening than Wikipedia, and if you can't or don't read there's the free audiobook version to download. Let's see then if you slough this off as published by morons.
https://mises.org/library/progressive-era-0 
RayR
6 years ago

Read through the rest of this after I posted my last response...

So if I'm understanding Ray Ray logic.

* If you don't believe in Jesus, then you're a progressive, anti-moral liberal.
* We should go back to gold and silver because depressions are better.
* And he has a secret atheist rape fetish (I'm sure that was in there somewhere, too lazy to scroll up).

bgz wrote:



💤
It seems your logic is limited to building straw men.
bgz
  • bgz
  • Herf-A-Holic
6 years ago
It's a legitimate hobby, good for scaring crows.
Speyside
6 years ago
Ray Ray and DG have their own beliefs which is fine. Everytime someone says only their beliefs are correct whether directly or indirectly I call out their hypocrisy.
bgz
  • bgz
  • Herf-A-Holic
6 years ago
Now I'm back too... RIP.
victor809
6 years ago

You give me the Wikipedia introduction to what is Progressivism? Progressivism is all "about enlightenment and positive social reform"??? Unicorns and rainbows and free lollypops for all the proles too and I guess?
Or did the promises of Progressivism as all Utopian movements do that claim "to represent the interests of ordinary people through political change and the support of government actions" (that's what every collectivist movement and dictator says too BTW), actually lead to a decent into the warfare-welfare state and its not so positive social reforms.
I prefer serious investigations into history, political movements, their origins and their legacy. Wikipedia is not a go-to place for such things. So I give you a book to read if you'd like, it's FREE too, and a million times more enlightening than Wikipedia, and if you can't or don't read there's the free audiobook version to download. Let's see then if you slough this off as published by morons.
https://mises.org/library/progressive-era-0 

RayR wrote:



Man.... "Mises Institute"

Hadn't heard of that one... had to look it up.
The first red flag is calling themselves an "Institute". It screams "Prager U" at first.

Then, I had to read this description twice: "The Ludwig von Mises Institute for Austrian Economics, or Mises Institute, is a nonprofit think-tank located in Auburn, Alabama"....

That's right folks. A Think Tank in Alabama. They mainly think about screwing their sister. But it's definitely a think tank.

But hey! they offer Masters program in austrian economics! That's totally brilliant.... oh.... they are un-accredited? Well that means their Masters has about as much value as a Prager U seminar, or Trump University.

Sigh.
Ok. Maybe this book linked will prove to be of some value.
Written in 2017... by Murray Rothbard.... who died in 1995..... that seems odd.
Ok... well let's see what the description is...


Progressivism brought the triumph of institutionalized racism, the disfranchising of blacks in the South, the cutting off of immigration, the building up of trade unions by the federal government into a tripartite of big government, big business, big union alliance, the glorifying of military virtues and conscription, and a drive for American expansion abroad. In short, the Progressive era ushered the modern American politico-economic system into being.


Yeah.... no. There's way too much demonizing of any group there for there to be accuracy.

So.... the most curious thing about this... RayR is accusing people of being "marxist progressives"
But the guy who wrote this book he wants everyone to read about the evils of progressives was atheist.

Such poor logic.

RayR
6 years ago
Go back to Wikipedia Victor, this is way over your head. You never heard of the Mises Institute? How about The Foundation for Economic Education or the American Institute for Economic Research?
Maybe they also draw a blank? I guess they are all banned as not allowable opinion at your favourite progressive mainstream media sources.
You've been living under a rock, then you took a 10 minute tour out of your comfort zone and now you think you've reaffirmed you already knew know everything there was to know and crawled back under. Anything else is conveniently labelled "poor logic". Do you have a "poor logic" alarm that goes off whenever topics get too heavy and uncomfortably close to the truth?
victor809
6 years ago

Go back to Wikipedia Victor, this is way over your head. You never heard of the Mises Institute? How about The Foundation for Economic Education or the American Institute for Economic Research?
Maybe they also draw a blank? I guess they are all banned as not allowable opinion at your favourite progressive mainstream media sources.
You've been living under a rock, then you took a 10 minute tour out of your comfort zone and now you think you've reaffirmed you already knew know everything there was to know and crawled back under. Anything else is conveniently labelled "poor logic". Do you have a "poor logic" alarm that goes off whenever topics get too heavy and uncomfortably close to the truth?

RayR wrote:



Why would anything be "banned"?
You realize you run immediately to these absolutes.... right?
"I sure as heck can decide whether a person is honourable or a lying, hypocritical scoundrel based their words and deeds, or is that illegal now?"

"I guess they are all banned as not allowable opinion at your favourite progressive mainstream media sources."

These are ridiculous statements, as they have absolutely nothing to do with the topics being discussed. They take the nonsense all the way to 11.

You list off a bunch of libertarian "think tanks" and think this is important? You realize literally anyone can say they are a think tank, right? There is no oversight into whether the "thinking" they are doing is in any way of value. I would give the same skepticism to anyone using liberal "think tank" references as some sort of support for anything.

All you've done is replace your opinion with someone else's.

Nothing you have said yet has even started to get "heavy".... and you've certainly not even found a direction to head to find "truth". But keep trying.
Dg west deptford
6 years ago
Haven't followed all this butread the last and as an aside-
Do you believe in absolute truth Vic?
Or could you be wrong about everything you think you know?
victor809
6 years ago
Ya already tried that silly universal truth website on me man.

The beautiful part about atheism though, is that even if I'm wrong about it, I haven't had to make changes to my life to be atheist.

However, statistically speaking it is likely that every single religious person is wrong. And they have all changed their lives in some way to follow an incorrect religion.
CelticBomber
6 years ago

Haven't followed all this butread the last and as an aside-
Do you believe in absolute truth Vic?
Or could you be wrong about everything you think you know?

Dg west deptford wrote:



So it's either absolute truth or nothing is true? smh.....

Asking about "Absolute Truth" is a bad question not worth answering. I'm absolutely positive about that.
Speyside
6 years ago
So if God doesn't exist why are the laws of physics immutable throughout the known universe? Also why is mathematics perfection? You are being intellectually dishonest with yourself when you say you didn't make a change in your life to be an Atheist. When born you neither believed in God or didn't believe in God. So at a minimum you have made one change and it is a significant one. Finally your last paragraph is incomplete. There are some who believe in God, but not religion. Perhaps their lives are based on individual perceptions of right and wrong
victor809
6 years ago

So if God doesn't exist why are the laws of physics immutable throughout the known universe? Also why is mathematics perfection? You are being intellectually dishonest with yourself when you say you didn't make a change in your life to be an Atheist. When born you neither believed in God or didn't believe in God. So at a minimum you have made one change and it is a significant one. Finally your last paragraph is incomplete. There are some who believe in God, but not religion. Perhaps their lives are based on individual perceptions of right and wrong

Speyside wrote:



I, like everyone else, was born atheist. I don't see how anything changed.



I'm curious why you think mathematics is "perfection"? That's not really true. Mathematicians like to say it is.... but it's just a representation of the world through numbers. Extraordinarily important, but just numbers. Numbers we have assigned based on our method of counting.


Physics is immutable because we have the same basic elements of construction across the entire universe. Physics is essentially defining laws we would understand around the interaction of particles, and clusters of particles. It is logical that these laws would be consistent everywhere we look, as we have not found a part of our known universe which uses anything different.

But, bottom line... every religion is wrong (it has to be, because even if there is a god, the innumerable potential permutations of said god ensure that a random person defining that god would do so incorrectly, and therefore follow a dogma based on an incorrect god). So even the smallest changes one has made to ones life to follow whatever religion they have chosen (or even defined in their head) is changing their life for an incorrect religion...

If it turns out there is a god, then I'm essentially guaranteed to be in exactly the same boat as everyone who is religious.
Dg west deptford
6 years ago
Yeah I recall you dodged the question before now that you mention it.
How 'bout this, do you believe in universal logic?
bgz
  • bgz
  • Herf-A-Holic
6 years ago
One thing I've learned about absolutes, is that people that believe in them are easily manipulated.

And people that preach them... well, I think you know where I'm going with that.
victor809
6 years ago

Yeah I recall you dodged the question before now that you mention it.
How 'bout this, do you believe in universal logic?

Dg west deptford wrote:



What do you imagine "universal logic" would be?

You have these terms... "universal truth"... "universal logic" but you just want to use them and ask people whether they believe in them, without clearly defining what you are asking.

It would be as if I asked you if you believed in "spiders" and then when you said you did, I quickly explained that spiders actually means "small aliens that fly down from neighboring galaxies and set up cities inside our bladders".
Users browsing this topic