Capitalism Is EVIL!

Into the Night said:
A price will be discovered. Sooner or later someone will come along and pay you the agreed upon price.
Click to expand...
or not.

it all depends on personal circumstances of seller and buyer.

changing all these circumstances around is how corporations use government control and fascism to game markets (individuals).
 
Blackwater Lunchbreak said:
or not.

it all depends on personal circumstances of seller and buyer.

changing all these circumstances around is how corporations use government control and fascism to game markets (individuals).
Click to expand...
Non-sequitur fallacy.
Redefinition fallacies.

Corporations are not government.
Corporations are damaged or destroyed by fascism.
Markets are not just individuals.
You cannot 'game' a free market. You cannot destroy the free market. It's immortal.
 
Into the Night said:
Non-sequitur fallacy.
Redefinition fallacies.

Corporations are not government.
Corporations are damaged or destroyed by fascism.
Markets are not just individuals.
You cannot 'game' a free market. You cannot destroy the free market. It's immortal.
Click to expand...
dude this is trash.

stupid strawmen and word games.....

corporations love fascism. its when the government enforces they're preferred policies.

like a law you must buy insurance, like a law you must take a drug.
 
Blackwater Lunchbreak said:
dude this is trash.
Click to expand...
Argument of the Stone fallacy.
Blackwater Lunchbreak said:
stupid strawmen and word games.....
Click to expand...
You are describing yourself again.
Blackwater Lunchbreak said:
corporations love fascism.
Click to expand...
Why would they? Fascism damages and destroys corporations. It is government theft of their productivity.
Blackwater Lunchbreak said:
its when the government enforces they're preferred policies.

like a law you must buy insurance, like a law you must take a drug.
Click to expand...
Both are fascism. Government is interfering with the market.
It is also tyranny.
 
Obtenebrator said:
Ahhh, so you are just guessing. I will remind you that contracts are extremely controlled arrangements.
Click to expand...
Yakuda said:
No not guessing at all. Don't be obtuse. It happens millions of times a day. Contracts are rather simple. As long as the two parties enter the contract voluntarily without distress and everyone agrees to the conditions it's a done deal.
Click to expand...

Obtenebrator is correct. While a contract might appear simple, it has to meet various legal requirements to be binding and enforceable, and those requirements are definitely not simple as you imply. At a minimum in the US, beyond a clear offer and acceptance, there must be consideration, mutual assent, capability of understanding and legality of purpose. It does absolutely no good to enter into a contract that either party can nix at will. This is why you always want to have a lawyer review any sort of contract before you sign, i.e. you want a trained professional to help you make sure everything is good-to-go as you intend.
 
Blackwater Lunchbreak said:
dude this is trash. stupid strawmen and word games.....
Click to expand...
Translation: You have no response and are therefore tipping your king.

Blackwater Lunchbreak said:
corporations love fascism.
Click to expand...
Not when the fascism is destroying the corporation. We've long since established that you are compelled to fill your posts with the word "fascism" despite not knowing what it means.

Blackwater Lunchbreak said:
its when the government enforces they're preferred policies.
Click to expand...
The government contains an Executive branch that is responsible for enforcing policies. Government existence is not fascism. I realize that you think everything is fascism but it just isn't.

You still haven't answered my question about whether there is anything, in your opinion, that isn't fascism. My assumption is that you can't think of any exceptions at this time.

Blackwater Lunchbreak said:
like a law you must buy insurance, like a law you must take a drug.
Click to expand...
The word you seek is "tyranny," not "fascism."
 
IBDaMann said:
Translation: You have no response and are therefore tipping your king.


Not when the fascism is destroying the corporation. We've long since established that you are compelled to fill your posts with the word "fascism" despite not knowing what it means.


The government contains an Executive branch that is responsible for enforcing policies. Government existence is not fascism. I realize that you think everything is fascism but it just isn't.

You still haven't answered my question about whether there is anything, in your opinion, that isn't fascism. My assumption is that you can't think of any exceptions at this time.


The word you seek is "tyranny," not "fascism."
Click to expand...
government and corporations working together in a monolithic power structure is fascism.

:truestory:
 
IBDaMann said:
Obtenebrator is correct. While a contract might appear simple, it has to meet various legal requirements to be binding and enforceable, and those requirements are definitely not simple as you imply. At a minimum in the US, beyond a clear offer and acceptance, there must be consideration, mutual assent, capability of understanding and legality of purpose. It does absolutely no good to enter into a contract that either party can nix at will. This is why you always want to have a lawyer review any sort of contract before you sign, i.e. you want a trained professional to help you make sure everything is good-to-go as you intend.
Click to expand...
Your talking legal contract I'm not. The vast majority of contracts aren't "legal" in the sense your talking about.
 
Into the Night said:
Why would they? Fascism damages and destroys corporations. It is government theft of their productivity.

Both are fascism. Government is interfering with the market.
It is also tyranny.
Click to expand...
sometimes corporations are in favor of government interference in markets.
that's what we call fascism.
 
Blackwater Lunchbreak said:
government and corporations working together in a monolithic power structure is fascism.
Click to expand...
Nope, not even close, but you are still operating under the axiom that everything is fascism. You still haven't been able to specify anything that isn't fascism. Do you see how ridiculous your perspective is?
 
Yakuda said:
Your talking legal contract I'm not. The vast majority of contracts aren't "legal" in the sense your talking about.
Click to expand...
Then they aren't contracts. You need to find a different word/term, perhaps "informal agreements," "handshake deals," etc...
 
IBDaMann said:
Nope, not even close, but you are still operating under the axiom that everything is fascism. You still haven't been able to specify anything that isn't fascism. Do you see how ridiculous your perspective is?
Click to expand...
you're a corporatist ass suck who's trying to redefine what fascism is.

:truestory:

most libertarians are now.

its so sad.
 
IBDaMann said:
Obtenebrator is correct. While a contract might appear simple, it has to meet various legal requirements to be binding and enforceable, and those requirements are definitely not simple as you imply. At a minimum in the US, beyond a clear offer and acceptance, there must be consideration, mutual assent, capability of understanding and legality of purpose. It does absolutely no good to enter into a contract that either party can nix at will. This is why you always want to have a lawyer review any sort of contract before you sign, i.e. you want a trained professional to help you make sure everything is good-to-go as you intend.
Click to expand...
No. Yakuda is correct. A contract can by anything that the two parties agree to. There does not even have to be 'legality of purpose', or a requirement that either party cannot nix the contract at will. Agreeing to ANY contract is 'mutual assent' by definition, not a legal requirement.

A contract is just an offer and consideration by definition. No legal requirement makes it otherwise.

What you are describing is how a court will view a contract, especially to procedures to follow for a contract to void, and by what guidelines they will enforce a contract to NOT void (to hold both parties in binding agreement). This is the US law you are referring to, but it is NOT required for a contract to exist. Just one that is enforceable by the courts.
 
IBDaMann said:
You hijacked the word "fascism" because you didn't think to use the correct word "tyranny." My proper usage of the word "fascism" does not constitute any sort of redefinition.
Click to expand...
that's a different word.

with a different meaning.


fascism is the union of state and corporate power.
 
Into the Night said:
Corporations are not fascism, even if they are providing goods or services for a government contract. Redefinition fallacy.
Click to expand...
strawman fallacy.

you lose.

if they pay off politicians for favorable policy or can just outright fund campaigns, its fascism.

you're also a sold out corporate ass munch liar.
 
Yakuda said:
Your talking legal contract I'm not. The vast majority of contracts aren't "legal" in the sense your talking about.
Click to expand...
Quite right. A so-called "handshake agreement" is a contract, even if it isn't enforceable by the courts.

If that handshake agreement contract is satisfied and completes, it is done, just as if it were a legally binding contract.
If either party backs out, that contract becomes void. Sometimes, such agreements are enforced by something other than a court, such as by vengeance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top