Ableton Forum

Steve Ballmer wrote:

nathannn wrote:No one likes competition when it comes to making money or fucking.
When a big store comes to town, the first thing they do is buy out the little store because they don't want competition.
I think if everyone asked themselves honestly if they like competing in order to live they would say no.
Competition is only really useful in sports and even then it can create an atmosphere of resentment.

Pussy.

Yep.
And thank you.

nathannn wrote:

Steve Ballmer wrote:

nathannn wrote:No one likes competition when it comes to making money or fucking.
When a big store comes to town, the first thing they do is buy out the little store because they don't want competition.
I think if everyone asked themselves honestly if they like competing in order to live they would say no.
Competition is only really useful in sports and even then it can create an atmosphere of resentment.

Pussy.

Yep.
And thank you.

'Pleasure.

Funk N. Furter wrote:

Steve Ballmer wrote:

Funk N. Furter wrote:A socialist economy would be a lot more efficient than a capitalist one. I already gave you one example that would give people more time: getting rid of unemployment, ie sharing out the work.

Lovely. Now could you possibly explain to us how you intend to get rid of unemployment?

By creating jobs, and, as I said, sharing out the work (ie reducing the working week).

A government could eliminate unemployment almost overnight.

And there is plenty that needs doing. Millions are waiting in vain for a council house. Thousands of building workers are on the dole or underemployed. It's not rocket science.

I'll let you google "broken window fallacy".

This is pretty much what your socialist buddy Hitler did.

I also like how you're now integrating the word "government" into your plan now.

Funk N. Furter wrote:

Steve Ballmer wrote: I'll let you google "broken window fallacy".

This is pretty much what your socialist buddy Hitler did.

I also like how you're now integrating the word "government" into your plan now.

This post shows the political maturity of a two year old. Well done, you're improving.

So you understand the broken window fallacy?

Funk N. Furter wrote:Yes. Why is it relevant to anything I've said?

Because "creating jobs". Or maybe you don't understand it?

Funk N. Furter wrote:

Steve Ballmer wrote:

Funk N. Furter wrote:Yes. Why is it relevant to anything I've said?

Because "creating jobs". Or maybe you don't understand it?

Of course I understand it, it's straightforward enough. But "Because "creating jobs" is not a sentence. It doesn't mean anything.

So you're saying you do understand it. But that you don't see how it's relevant. But that you understand it. But that you don't see how it's relevant. But that you understand it.

Funk N. Furter wrote:Exactly

It is obvious that you have not done your homework.

Grade: F

Funk N. Furter wrote:So, er, did you have a point you wanted to make, or did you just come across the "broken windows fallacy" on the net and thought you'd randomly chuck it in, hoping to impress me?

I want you to love me. That's all I ask.

Funk N. – handicapped as nature intended.

Funk N. Furter wrote: Please explain why the Swiss work fewer hours than the Greeks.

Christ really? a banking system that's essentially a tax shelter VS a banking system that plunged a country into debt, there that was easy.

Please explain why the USA is so dammed powerful and the people work their asses off to get what they can and maintain that level of prosperity?
or Germany,
or England,
Crazy huh?

Straw man argument.

The same thing still applies, you can't immediately talk about lowering the work week to fix unemployment and wage disparity, that's going to sink an economy, not fix it. I think one thing people never take into account with the wage disparity that we have now is a simple easy to understand problem that emerges when you try to level the playing field, mostly the rich are dealing in power, Bill gates and the like are keeping money (power) that isn't redistributable. We don't all become millionaires, we don't all get to have the nicest macbook pros, and live in waterfront property etc.

Again, everyone who was physically capable would still have to work a full 40 until this all got settled, and to talk about less than 40 from the start is a hippy pipe dream. and like I said, societies that do not value work, who are not being exploited, do not produce a powerful economy.

Because the government can only consume, it cannot produce. It can redistribute jobs (at a cost), it cannot create jobs. Because broken window.

As for 35 hours, I invite you to take a long, hard look at France.

Because broken window.

Look to the broken window and you'll see why the state cannot create jobs without destroying at least an equal number of existing jobs.

Funk N. Furter wrote:

Machinesworking wrote: I think one thing people never take into account with the wage disparity that we have now is a simple easy to understand problem that emerges when you try to level the playing field, mostly the rich are dealing in power, Bill gates and the like are keeping money (power) that isn't redistributable. We don't all become millionaires, we don't all get to have the nicest macbook pros, and live in waterfront property etc.

Why is it not possible to redistribute his wealth? Why can't we all have macbook pros and live in nice houses?

Because money does not equal goods and services anymore, and hasn't for a long time. The rich are trading on power, not gold.
If all the money in the world was redistributed equally, we would all be broke. Most of the world is broke, most currency is actually worthless. There is not enough waterfront property for all 7 billion of us. These kinds of problems don't instantly get fixed by rallies to cut the work week.