So what’s the difference between capitalism and markets? I would have thought the freer the market the more capitalistic it was, not so much that there’s a separation of the two.
I’m still having trouble understanding what you mean, and I realize it’s probably because I’ve never actually thought about what you’re saying before. I’ve heard “the system is a scam” before and probably said it a bunch of times but never thought about what that meant other than “everything’s unfair.”
It doesn’t really make much sense. There’s no nuance in it. Is the money system a scam? Is having access to it a scam? Without access I can only imagine life would be a lot harder. Is the education sysytem a scam? What part of it? The part where it’s free? Without it we wouldn’t even be having this conversation.
Can you please tell me what the system is a scam means? (Seriously I’m curious what you think) Or is it just pointing out the varying degrees of unfairness that exist throughout it?
I like how the dispensers roll holder is always too tight so it over tensions and breaks the paper and the elasticity sends it back up and around the top of the roll. Then you have to pull the roll through by pushing up against it at the same time to get it back out but you go the wrong way so you reverse and then there’s too much length so that when it comes free it’s too long and it touches the ground. So you break it off and throw it away and start again, pulling the roll only for it to over tension and snap again
Ok so you’re missing my point. If there are two groups of people living side by side and one group decide to murder 10 people from the other group, you’re trying to say it’s immoral if the other group kills more than 10??? Am I getting this insanity correct? We skip over the whole deciding to murder 10 people in the first place and we start our ethical counters only once the retaliating group hits what the original murderers deem as reasonable retribution? If it’s overstepped, now is when the immorality begins? This has the most retarded parts of eye for an eye written all over it. No man has the moral judgment for eye for an eye to be functional. Of course lots of people think they do and then fail to understand why others think they were unreasonable in their retaliation.
I apologise but if you’re getting frustrated because you used a word that means something else as well and you showed me that a dictionary agrees, it appears you will need to clarify it with your own words rather than rely on implicit links and assumptions. If you think I don’t understand that money becomes useless if no one believes in it I’m aware of that. Money is made up as much as any other social contract is made up. My point is some social contracts are useful, like money. Money is simply a tool that acts as an intermediary for a social contract. If it wasn’t useful we wouldn’t use it.
It’s only fair or something