You're banned for not properly coloring your text like you're supposed to.
SleepingSilence
Member
OC, Plz No Stealz.
- Last Seen: 10 hrs ago
- Joined: 10 yrs ago
- Posts: 4704 (1.25 / day)
- VMs: 5
-
Username history
- SleepingSilence 10 yrs ago
-
Latest 10 profile visitors:
-
Most recent →
RPM,
Birdboy,
xVampire3go,
Antlers,
Space Core,
X Fiendfyre X,
Zeus23,
Hibachi90,
Nightwing95,
BurnDaWitch
Status
User has no status, yet
Bio
My Very Brief Bio
Male, 33 years old. (I'm even more dead than before.)
Likes (other than writing and roleplaying): I'm into all genres of music. I love to cook. I love the outdoors, and walking through the park near my house. (Yes, really.) I read a lot of thriller/mystery novels. And I usually watch seasonal anime. (Or cooking shows. Because Western Media provides even fewer things that are worth watching.)
But as for my many other neglected hobbies, I've played basically every sport. (Soccer and Bowling being my favorite of the bunch.) And I'm trying to play more video games. (Going through my never-ending Steam library.) Plus, I've dabbled in making electronic & metal music, and I used to play a number of instruments. (Guitar, French Horn, etc.)
My 1X1 Interest Check: SleepingSilence's Tavern (Want 1x1 RP's? Please come in.)
Hope you have a wonderful day!
Most Recent Posts
*debating that my other idea was better*
@Andreyich Yes, they really do. Regulations do hurt small businesses (more than big ones.) if you didn't think that was true. You wouldn't say we need to use them on only big businesses.
And if you don't think applying too many restrictions on big business won't lead to negative consequences, I don't even know what to tell you other than linking to how many jobs are being outsourced for that reason...
I apologize, I'm probably not in the mood to discuss politics and I'm used to the conduct of this forum and I'm not going as in depth as I should if I wanted to properly discuss this.
It's a simple rebuttal/explanation video, but most of the time it's a simple argument that people make. And I don't really see anything that deep in this either.
You say you want mostly environmental restrictions and quality of life kind of stuff. Like making sure there's no lead 'put' in lipstick, right? But are you arguing you only want to make big corporations to go under those restrictions? (correct? Like I'm not talking over you am I? Do you want restrictions on all business? Or "big" ones?)
And how big, is big business? (again there's many problems with that.) And why do you think we need the government to try environmental restrictions? Like Europe going with a cap and trade system. (making their carbon emissions skyrocket upwards...)
And if you don't think applying too many restrictions on big business won't lead to negative consequences, I don't even know what to tell you other than linking to how many jobs are being outsourced for that reason...
I apologize, I'm probably not in the mood to discuss politics and I'm used to the conduct of this forum and I'm not going as in depth as I should if I wanted to properly discuss this.
It's a simple rebuttal/explanation video, but most of the time it's a simple argument that people make. And I don't really see anything that deep in this either.
You say you want mostly environmental restrictions and quality of life kind of stuff. Like making sure there's no lead 'put' in lipstick, right? But are you arguing you only want to make big corporations to go under those restrictions? (correct? Like I'm not talking over you am I? Do you want restrictions on all business? Or "big" ones?)
And how big, is big business? (again there's many problems with that.) And why do you think we need the government to try environmental restrictions? Like Europe going with a cap and trade system. (making their carbon emissions skyrocket upwards...)
@Dynamo Frokane Taking quotes out of context, sure is fun. :D
So here's my own. Because I lack the ability to give a shit today.
So here's my own. Because I lack the ability to give a shit today.
Everyone's favorite guild pervert @dynamo frokane has been reported multiple times for asking way too many personal things to girls in their dm's and nothing has been done about him.
@Andreyich Again how would restrictions like that even work? Like how about the restriction that any business that gets over 50 employees (part/full doesn't matter) needs to provide health insurance. That's a restriction that stunts growth, how would YOU make that rule justifiable? Add a 0? Add two? Then ask yourself Why on earth would anyone hire that many people?
Restrictions only hurt small businesses. Try to purposefully screw the bigger ones, and they'll move somewhere that won't. People seem to assume ones with no power can try to bully those that worked for a living and took a risk, they'll leave and you'll only make everyone worse off as a result. We have one of the highest corporate tax rates...
Like eating the rich, and bar stool economics should have taught by now. Making the rich "pay", for being wealthy. Is just greed and it doesn't lead to any actual positive results.
Restrictions only hurt small businesses. Try to purposefully screw the bigger ones, and they'll move somewhere that won't. People seem to assume ones with no power can try to bully those that worked for a living and took a risk, they'll leave and you'll only make everyone worse off as a result. We have one of the highest corporate tax rates...
Like eating the rich, and bar stool economics should have taught by now. Making the rich "pay", for being wealthy. Is just greed and it doesn't lead to any actual positive results.
@Vilageidiotx People becoming rich, doesn't hurt the poor. They do not correlate. It is not reasonable at all. If having "uber" rich people was only/solely due to negatively effecting the rest of society, our poor would not be doing better than the average global middle class. :/
@Andreyich But that's not how it realistically works in practice, so that's meaningless...also what's a "big business" to you? Because there's a lot of nonsense we could go into with that...(Like Bernie Sanders and the "50" employees needs to provide medical benefits thing. Why specifically that number? There is no reason for it.)
No one should be penalized for making money and becoming successful. It's a ludicrous idea.
Also, because you already dived into the "trolling opinion is lul" pool. I'm not wasting my time with "oh so joking" opinions am I? (That's a problem with "ha, look bait so clever" things on the internet, you immediately lose the ability to be taken seriously ever.)
Because I reply to it, not because I buy that it's a real opinion or not,
I comment because if anyone believes it, you intentionally or not made someone dumber as a result.
Since spreading misinformation for lulz, is cancerous and idiotic and it makes the less intelligent believe in vaccines causing autism or pot being remotely good for you...
No one should be penalized for making money and becoming successful. It's a ludicrous idea.
Also, because you already dived into the "trolling opinion is lul" pool. I'm not wasting my time with "oh so joking" opinions am I? (That's a problem with "ha, look bait so clever" things on the internet, you immediately lose the ability to be taken seriously ever.)
Because I reply to it, not because I buy that it's a real opinion or not,
I comment because if anyone believes it, you intentionally or not made someone dumber as a result.
Since spreading misinformation for lulz, is cancerous and idiotic and it makes the less intelligent believe in vaccines causing autism or pot being remotely good for you...
@Andreyich So you want strong/many regulations for businesses, correct?
What if I told you, big businesses constantly support big regulations/fines etc.? Because they know they can pay them, but their competition can't. So restricting the ability to make/start a business and what you can do in them, will always be loved by places that want to further their monopolies. Because all that does it hurt the free market and competition.
What if I told you, big businesses constantly support big regulations/fines etc.? Because they know they can pay them, but their competition can't. So restricting the ability to make/start a business and what you can do in them, will always be loved by places that want to further their monopolies. Because all that does it hurt the free market and competition.
@Darcs The irony is thick.
So Corporatism...
Though I agree, that's bad. I also want to point out, it's almost completely democrat candidates/issues where lobbyists give their funding towards. :/
Again, I also don't think that has anything to do with your vote. <.<
So Corporatism...
Though I agree, that's bad. I also want to point out, it's almost completely democrat candidates/issues where lobbyists give their funding towards. :/
Again, I also don't think that has anything to do with your vote. <.<
<Snipped quote by SleepingSilence>
Yes obviously. How could I be such a fool to ever assume that capitalism, in practice, is completely separate from the state, and lawmakers make laws based on the needs of the people, separate from the dominating economic system. Ethical capitalism exists!
Citation needed for otherwise. Because that was a non-point. :/
@Andreyich When you say they should have "control" of business. What exactly do you think they "should" control? I feel like all that's there is the vagueness.
Are you implying that the big corporations are controlling the government? (or could do that.) And subsequently implying, that even more government oversight/regulations/red tape will somehow aid this problem?
© 2007-2026