patrick.net

Another reason to vote Republican ass out of office. They really believe that shit. Unless your in the richest 1% -- and they implement policies to make sure you can't be -- then you are morally inferior in their perverted worldview.

Just remember, that unless you are making at least $500,000 while doing no work and producing nothing (just making this money by owning thing), you are a scumbag according to them.

So why give them your vote?

Hey, I deleted it because it was under-appreciated. I can put it back if people want to participate.

Reinstated. But if it keeps sinking past the bottom of the screen without some action I will delete it again.

I never knew you are such a fan. You even noticed that little thread I created. :-)

Peter P says

Every person should think he is poor and he must get rich.

That's not the issue. It's how people get rich.

Most of the 0.1% got rich by exploiting others rather than by actually producing wealth. Meanwhile, the wealth producers do not get rich even if they create literally trillions of dollars of wealth.

Examples:
Tim Berners-Lee, inventor of the World Wide Web
Edgar F. Codd, inventor of relational databases

Meanwhile, assholes like Larry Ellison become billionaires when they haven't contributed jack diddly shit. If your economic system is so damn good at rewarding innovation and productivity, then why the hell did Codd not get rich after inventing the technology upon which almost all computing is based, but Ellison did get filthy rich off of Codd's invention?

And why did Tim Berners-Lee not become the world's richest man after inventing the WWW, yet Zuckerfuck is rich?

Your belief that capitalism rewards the creation of wealth is historically inaccurate. When theory and observation contradict, theory is wrong.

Peter P says

I never knew you are such a fan. You even noticed that little thread I created. :-)

It's hard not to notice something that stinks so bad.

Dan8267 says

It's hard not to notice something that stinks so bad.

When nobody responded so I assumed it was not noticed. I will calibrate.

But thanks for advertising for me. :-)

On the contrary, I think Larry Ellison is the closest thing to an Ubermensch in the modern world.

because codd was too stupid to patent his inventions.
ellison was smart enough to recognize a cash cow when he saw it.

Dan8267 says

If your economic system is so damn good at rewarding innovation and productivity, then why the hell did Codd not get rich after inventing the technology upon which almost all computing is based, but Ellison did get filthy rich off of Codd's invention?

SoftShell says

because codd was too stupid to patent his inventions.

ellison was smart enough to recognize a cash cow when he saw it.

One, that just confirms that capitalism doesn't do what its advocates say. Two, Codd could not own the patents because employers always cease control of their employee's intellectual property. Another reason capitalism fails to reward or motivate innovation. Three, plenty of people saw the economic potential of relational databases. Four, it takes far more intelligence to come up with the idea and details of relational databases than to see a greedy opportunity.

The bottom line is that capitalism FAILED to reward the true wealth producer and rewarded a parasite instead. No cop out can mitigate this fact.

Capitalism rewards innovation and productivity by making them relevant.

Inventors are like great chefs. Without patrons who pay a steep premium for good food even the best restaurant cannot survive.

Tech money in SF and hedge fund money in London obviously improved the food scene.

Capitalism is the patrons.

Dan8267 says

Four, it takes far more intelligence to come up with the idea and details of relational databases than to see a greedy opportunity.

Another reason why intelligence is overrated.

If Codd was so smart he would not have been an employee.

Dan8267 says

The bottom line is that capitalism FAILED to reward the true wealth producer and rewarded a parasite instead. No cop out can mitigate this fact.

What creates a cuisine? The chef, or the patrons?

Perhaps restaurant customers are parasites? No, parasites are what live inside restaurant customers.

Peter P says

Capitalism rewards innovation and productivity

History disproves your statement.

Peter P says

Another reason why intelligence is overrated.

A foolish remark in an age based on technology.

Peter P says

If Codd was so smart he would not have been an employee.

Empirically false. The most intelligent people are the ones doing the real work, in STEM, not the dumb ass executives who gain power by backstabbing people.

It appears your definition of "intelligence" amounts to nothing more than tribal politics.

To even refer to Codd as unintelligent demonstrates why your opinions carry no weight.

Peter P says

Perhaps restaurant customers are parasites?

No, they are customers analogous to people who burn the coal that miners mine. The miners, like the chef in your example, is the wealth producer. The parasite is the one who "owns" the mineral rights because he bribed, er lobbied, politicians for them. That's capitalism. It's all about rewarding ownership, not wealth production.

No twisted lies you have said changes this. And the owner class has no basis for moral superiority to the working class.

Dan8267 says

A foolish remark in an age based on technology.

History has proved that intelligence does not matter in technology. It is about people trying hard enough in a environment that cherishes ownership and windfall profits.

The emergence of technology is driven by risk-takers chasing the fat-tail.

Dan8267 says

Empirically false. The most intelligent people are the ones doing the real work, in STEM, not the dumb ass executives who gain power by backstabbing people.

Empirically? It goes back to my argument that intelligence was invented by self-proclaimed "intelligent" people to make themselves feel better.

SoftShell says

ellison was smart enough to recognize a cash cow when he saw it.

Ellison was an employee not cofounder of Oracle.
In fact he was laid off twice from Oracle then rehired.

There are also lot a lot of people who think Bill Gates coded DOS. (he bought a piece of code called Quick and Dirty OS from a bum that was coding there and sold it to IBM)

Capitalism doesn't reward intelligence or knowledge or skill, it rewards opportunism.

Then add another layer of stupidity to codd, for not working for himself to protect his discoveries, as any other self respecting entrepreneur would...

Dan8267 says

Codd could not own the patents because employers always cease control of their employee's intellectual property.

wrong again.
it rewards if you know how to innovate AND protect your discoveries.
If you're too stupid to implement these two simple concepts, you don't deserve capitalistic success.

Dan8267 says

Another reason capitalism fails to reward or motivate innovation.

so what?

Dan8267 says

Three, plenty of people saw the economic potential of relational databases.

Heraclitusstudent says

There are also lot a lot of people who think Bill Gates coded DOS. (he bought a piece of code called Quick and Dirty OS from a bum that was coding there and sold it to IBM)

If "a lot" of people think so, then it is the truth, plain and simple.

Heraclitusstudent says

Capitalism doesn't reward intelligence or knowledge or skill, it rewards opportunism.

This is why capitalism is great.

Dan8267 says

Peter P says

Another reason why intelligence is overrated.

A foolish remark in an age based on technology.

You are talking to a conservative, for whom being dull is a badge of honor.

Heraclitusstudent says

Ellison was an employee not cofounder of Oracle.

In fact he was laid off twice from Oracle then rehired.

Then more power to him. His will-to-power prevailed.

wrong.
The implementation of a discovery may demand more intelligence than the actual discovery itself. Each situation is unique.

Dan8267 says

Four, it takes far more intelligence to come up with the idea and details of relational databases than to see a greedy opportunity.

SoftShell says

it rewards if you know how to innovate AND protect your discoveries.

It rewards the assertion of your will-to-power, which is the underlying drive of everything.

And this statement exhibits the folly of your rant.
It is not up to capitalism to reward anyone.
It is up to capitalism to provide the opportunity for anyone to innovate, protect, and implement.
It is up to the individual to take advantage of that opportunity.

Dan8267 says

The bottom line is that capitalism FAILED to reward the true wealth producer

Peter P says

If "a lot" of people think so, then it is the truth, plain and simple.

A lot of people thought Hitler was great. Apparently you too.
Moron.

Peter P says

Heraclitusstudent says

Capitalism doesn't reward intelligence or knowledge or skill, it rewards opportunism.

This is why capitalism is great.

Thanks for showing you have no value whatsoever but pure greed.
For people like you nothing is worth anything. Let's face it: Einstein, Mozart, Leonardo were just losers who died poor.
It's just all about money, money, money, for morally deficient bastards like that.

Then they come and give lessons about religion!

always back to the police with you....always back to the police...

Dan8267 says

No cop out can mitigate this fact.

SoftShell says

The implementation of a discovery may demand more intelligence than the actual discovery itself.

Which "implementation", Larry didn't do either.

And why do you think he kept coming back....because he recognized the bigass cash cow...

Heraclitusstudent says

SoftShell says

ellison was smart enough to recognize a cash cow when he saw it.

Ellison was an employee not cofounder of Oracle.

In fact he was laid off twice from Oracle then rehired.

Agreed.
Heraclitusstudent says

Capitalism doesn't reward intelligence or knowledge or skill, it rewards opportunism.

SoftShell says

And why do you think he kept coming back....because he recognized the bigass cash cow...

Either that or he was crying like a little boy and they had pity of him.

Heraclitusstudent says

It's just all about money, money, money, for morally deficient bastards like that.

If you want to enjoy some good bashing of the Bourgeois, don't read Marx, read Aristos from the 18th/19th Century.

"Well it's obvious he's impotent. Only a eunuch has such a fascination with money because they can get no other satisfaction, and impotent men's humors must be similarly effected. It explains why his wife goes on and on about flogging, whipping and discipline; he can't perform, poor woman."

Heraclitusstudent says

A lot of people thought Hitler was great.

To them, it was the truth. They lost the war, so it is no longer true. I am pro-Israel by the way.

It is not about money. It is about getting what you want.

Those who are slaves to money might as well be poor.

Stop being so narrowminded and try applying my quote below to the millions of discoveries over the centuries. See what you can come up with.

Heraclitusstudent says

SoftShell says

The implementation of a discovery may demand more intelligence than the actual discovery itself.

Which "implementation", Larry didn't do either.

'pity for him'.

whatever, it worked.

Heraclitusstudent says

SoftShell says

And why do you think he kept coming back....because he recognized the bigass cash cow...

Either that or he was crying like a little boy and they had pity of him.

SoftShell says

Stop being so narrow minded and try applying my quote below to the millions of discoveries over the centuries. See what you can come up with.

Very few rich people.

Peter P says

It is not about money. It is about getting what you want.

Hey you're the one who writes threads bashing the poor and glorifying the rich.

You know society is becoming tilted too far to the margins when hard work starts to be attacked as not deserving of respect or even a living.

Heraclitusstudent says

Thanks for showing you have no value whatsoever but pure greed.

Greed is just the fear of missing out. However, the desire to dominate is innate to every living thing in the universe.