Ableton Forum

Funk N. Furter wrote:I'm bored with your games. I came here for a proper argument. Fat chance.

'Bout time you made some friends in the real world

Well! I had an A+ snap to render you all de-pixelated, but alas, I spilled my chai-slurpee on my mac sticker which was covering my Asus insignia-Mac-only cafe, capisce! So I'll get back to you when I'm in a state where a man is not judged by the size of his apple.

Steve Ballmer wrote:

Machinesworking wrote:Again, it was private companies that funded the Nazis, they were afraid of socialism. They also until the Nazis started losing the war, made all kinds of cash off of WWII. The Nazis being responsible for roughly 40 million deaths, easily beat good old Stalin. So a "freer market" anyway, really let hell loose.

The Nazi market was no freer, and Stalin killed up to 60 million. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Sta ... of_victims)

The Nazi market was indeed freer than the Soviet Union under Stalin. Of course during wartime this went away to a degree, but in terms of degrees, the Soviet Union completely got rid of private ownership, the Nazis only established certain public works, and demanded all citizens and businesses to participate in it's war efforts. There were still private citizens running private companies that made much more than others etc. under the Nazis.

Plus, the "up to 60 million" number includes famines not necessarily attributable to the Soviets, and the revolution itself, the cost of getting rid of the tsar basically. The Nazis ran freaking factories to kill, +/-13 million in camps, the military deaths and had a "War of Annihilation" with the USSR, essentially killing around 16 million civilians in a genocide the west for whatever reason refuses to acknowledge.

So, Nazis= 40 million confirmed kills
Soviets = Muddy number, primarily because we were in a cold war with their totalitarian regime, and propped up whatever number we wanted to in order to feel good about using a lot of the same techniques the Nazis used to try and stop the onslaught of Soviet style communism. I would go with the number the Russian Federation attributes to Stalin, not what our own pundits come up with. The most widely accepted answer is around 20 million, that seems about right. http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_peop ... talin_kill

I'm interested in the economic post you did, and when I get back to Seattle I'll get a chance to get into this some more, that point though I've often thought was silly, Stalin didn't kill more people than Hitler, he certainly killed more of his own people though!

Funk N. Furter wrote:

Steve Ballmer wrote:

Funk N. Furter wrote:I'm bored with your games. I came here for a proper argument. Fat chance.

'Bout time you made some friends in the real world

I do, and I get more political discussion from one of them in one evening than off you in a lifetime. Even my mum, who refuses to discuss politics.

What is the point of starting a political thread and then refusing to discuss it?

You are a pussy cat and I am a shark, and we are in the ocean. Well, I am. You are timidly standing at the edge, fascinated by the shiny blue stuff but instinctively understanding that it's best for you not to venture in.

I am discussing a number of economic (not "political") things with a number of people on this thread. There are many conflicting views, yet everyone seems fairly happy and everyone has their say heard. You on the other hand have spent your time producing white noise, misunderstanding things (on purpose?) and posting OT. When you disputed these claims, and challenged me to provide you with a single example of you posting OT, I had to look no further than the previous page. However, when presented with the crystal clear evidence, you claimed I was "smoke screening".

This is why you're having difficulty "debating" here; you don't understand how a debate works. If you want people to discuss things fairly with you, you need show us that you are willing to consider points of view that are not your own. Otherwise, we're just talking at ourselves.

As for your last comments, you're not a shark. You can hardly walk, see or type. In a natural setting, you wouldn't last 5 minutes. You come on to forums like this to try to give yourself a false sense of power. For all your brain power, did you not realise that one day you'd meet someone both smarter and tougher than yourself? I'm just surprised it didn't happen sooner. Statistically, it should have.

Funk N. Furter wrote:Even my mum, who refuses to discuss politics.

Funk N. Furter wrote:

Steve Ballmer wrote:I'm just surprised it didn't happen sooner. Statistically, it should have.

And when is it supposed to have happened? Surely you don't mean you?

I have at the very least demonstrated superior reading skills, which by no means are they only metric for intelligence, but are still not entirely inconsequential.

Case in point: I understood immediately that Machines meant "than the USSR" when he used the word "freer". You, on the other hand, had to resort to begging me over several posts to clarify Machines fairly straightforward claim.

Not all kids who are sent to "special schools" are "geniuses".

Funk N. Furter wrote:

Steve Ballmer wrote:If you want people to discuss things fairly with you, you need show us that you are willing to consider points of view that are not your own. Otherwise, we're just talking at ourselves.

I'm willing to consider them, and in most cases rebut them, debunk them, destroy them. I would do it to you but you rarely actually make a point. You concentrate on the personal because you can't debate the politics. Not me anyway.

Even if you were willing and capable of having a go, I would chew you up and spit you out without even waking from my lunchtime nap. I have heard all your nonsense a thousand times from deluded 20 year old Americans on the internet. You just represent the must incredibly brainwashed and blinkered section of the Tea Party. I represent Trotskyism.

Here is a real debate between my ideas and yours

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXHAEX_5 ... l5wkebii68

I drank tea before it was cool.

Funk N. Furter wrote:In the 1930s, when the rest of the world was nationalising (to try to survive the Depression), the Nazis carried out widespread privatisation.

Wikipedia says their policies were essentially keynesian, which lumps them in directly with Obama and the like.

Funk N. Furter wrote: It was still mainly a free market with plenty of corporate welfare, such as the Nazi regime supplying slave labour, eradicating unions, and crushing all workers' rights. Real wages of course dropped.

Free-market + welfare ? free-market

Funk N. Furter wrote:

Steve Ballmer wrote:

Funk N. Furter wrote:In the 1930s, when the rest of the world was nationalising (to try to survive the Depression), the Nazis carried out widespread privatisation.

Wikipedia says their policies were essentially keynesian, which lumps them in directly with Obama and the like.

Funk N. Furter wrote: It was still mainly a free market with plenty of corporate welfare, such as the Nazi regime supplying slave labour, eradicating unions, and crushing all workers' rights. Real wages of course dropped.

Free-market + welfare ? free-market

Corporate welfare ? welfare

Off-topic.

Funk N. Furter wrote:

Steve Ballmer wrote: My mummy says their policies were essentially keynesian, which lumps them in directly with Obama and the like.

Lie.

Funk N. Furter wrote:

Steve Ballmer wrote:
Case in point: I understood immediately that Machines meant "than the USSR" when he used the word "freer". You, on the other hand, had to resort to begging me over several posts to clarify Machines fairly straightforward claim.

If you want to debate with me, which of course you don't because you are incapable, then you have to learn to actually make a point in a clear self contained post, in your own words, in English, in real joined-up writing. I'm not prepared to play your silly guessing games.

My point is simple: You are quasi-illiterate, dishonest, lazy, alcoholic troll.

Discuss.

Funk N. Furter wrote:

Steve Ballmer wrote:My critique of socialism also extends to those governments you deem "fascist", such as Hitler's Germany.

Hitler's Germany was fascist. Socialism does not include fascism, it is the exact opposite. Fascism is a form of capitalism.

A 12 year old would know this.

10/10 for political ineptitude.

It all depends on the metric you use. But as we have already established that you are incapable of considering views that are not your own, the discussion stops here. This is on you, not me.

10/10 for being a douche.

Steve Ballmer wrote:My critique of socialism also extends to those governments you deem "fascist", such as Hitler's Germany.

Funk N. Furter wrote:
Hitler's Germany was fascist. Socialism does not include fascism, it is the exact opposite. Fascism is a form of capitalism.

A 12 year old would know this.

10/10 for political ineptitude.

Steve Ballmer wrote: It all depends on the metric you use. But as we have already established that you are incapable of considering views that are not your own, the discussion stops here. This is on you, not me.

10/10 for being a douche.

He's right here, you're assuming that Libertarianism means total Capitalism as we know it, when it means to Balmer at least in this discussion, a form of Capitalism that's close in ideology to pure Anarchists, who believe all forms of government of any kind should be abolished or reduced to nothing.

You've established that you believe that a benevolent Socialist centralized government will eventually give up it's power and bring on a Communist workers paradise, this is the exact opposite belief that Balmer holds, that a centralized government will take power from people no matter what it's called, socialist, fascist, military dictatorship, democratic capitalist etc.

I'm wary of both, I think power in the hands of large businesses has, does, and will be used only for profit, with no regard for human life and the betterment of society. I think any centralized power with no fear of retribution from the masses becomes corrupt over time. I'm not a fan of democracy in theory, or in practice, but it's the only working method of regulating large businesses and governments. Otherwise we have either totalitarianism or corporat-tocracy. Balmer seems to believe that large privately owned businesses without any government help or intervention will not end up being the kind of genocidal anti human machines that military dictatorships have shown themselves to be whatever name they say they are, fascist, socialist, democratic etc.

Now back to putting the final cement in the holes for the fence I'm building for my parents.