ionised

47 ms·

541.
by ionised 8y ago
What exactly is captitalism serving if not the intersts of humans?
542.
by ionised 8y ago
> Back to the straw-manning, I suppose. I never made those claims. Not overtly no. You just heavily implied that anyone working for minimum wage or even simply earning less than you are has somehow lived a life of bad decisions and moral
543.
by ionised 8y ago
It is a 'profession' as in occupation, sure, but it is not a Profession like a doctor or (real) engineer.
544.
by ionised 8y ago
He was given hundreds of thousands of dollars by his parents to start a business. Not exactly humble beginnings.
545.
by ionised 8y ago
Then that company shouldn't exist.
546.
by ionised 8y ago
> Pretty lame analysis. There are lots of companies that are in it to do good or actually improve society. Like who?
547.
by ionised 8y ago
If at first you don't succeed...
548.
by ionised 8y ago
> seems to me that employers are working to make sure that doesn't happen. Pay is very, very good. Most of us make multiples of median household income in our respective areas. Plus have better working conditions. Most software deve
549.
by ionised 8y ago
That's not why they exist. They exist to protect and maintain the status quo for those that benefit from it.
550.
by ionised 8y ago
Probably because that's what the name suggests.
551.
by ionised 8y ago
I'm very aware of Friedman's work and I think it's time we all stopped listening to the words of that fascist-apologist hack.
552.
by ionised 8y ago
> They may be but US is on the right side of history on this one. And I say this as an European. As anopther European, the US is most certainly on the wrong side of history with this shit. They're still salty that their pet dictator
553.
by ionised 8y ago
Why should we care if WhatsApp can't sustain itself?
554.
by ionised 8y ago
I think you've answered your own question. There wouldn't be any point, and it would be totally fine.
555.
by ionised 8y ago
No, you're a fundamentalist if you stick to an ideology (e.g. trickle-down) in spite of all evidence suggesting it is highly flawed. > It's impossible to have a discussion about anything if some things are not taken as axiomati
556.
by ionised 8y ago
Are those the only two options you can see? Trickle-down economics or communism?
557.
by ionised 8y ago
That's not what a monopoly is.
558.
by ionised 8y ago
That's a lot of words to basically tell us that you believe in demonic possession.
559.
by ionised 8y ago
Usually when someone says something you don't like or disagree with, you counter with an argument of your own. If you can't think of anything to say in response, might I suggest that you either don't know the subject as well
560.
by ionised 8y ago
I mean, I use both daily and this just isn't true.
561.
by ionised 8y ago
That's a charming degree of trust you have in our intelligence services to be acting in your interests. Their track record doesn't support it very well though, unless your interests happen to align with the economic elite and soci
562.
by ionised 8y ago
A blessing from who? God?
563.
by ionised 8y ago
Doesn't seem that way.
564.
by ionised 8y ago
Literally anywhere else.
565.
by ionised 8y ago
We're not talking about Microsoft here. We are talking about Google.
566.
by ionised 8y ago
I think it's time we all stopped listening to anything Friedman said.
567.
by ionised 8y ago
The person you are responding to said exactly that.
568.
by ionised 8y ago
Another example of Milton Friedman being a hack.
569.
by ionised 8y ago
Not everything needs to make a profit. In fact it's better that some things don't. And using European trains as an example of poor service is mind-boggling. They are far, far better than the US or UK offerings (which are privatise
570.
by ionised 8y ago
What has communism got to do with any of this?

More ›