113

That's great, good for you.

Because even if you could buy billing.info it would get blocked pretty quickly.

"Wet Social" sounds like something very different.

Do you live in Venezuela?

Corporations operate for profit.

Are you saying racism doesn't exist because you elected Obama?

Housing is a right.

Tycho, I've heard the same from lots of others. Dive is classic, Sunrise Projector is my favourite.

"vast, overwhelming majority of people"

You gonna back that up?

It would be impossible for the site to have every password ever compromised.

It can only check against a database of known password leaks.

>There has not been a single hijacking or terrorism related death on a commercial airliner in the US since the TSA was created.

I have an anti-tiger rock to sell you.

You are correct that your feudal system is not a capitalist one, as the blacksmith does not own (he is not able to sell) his means of production.

The most underlying and critical point of capitalism is an individual's right of access to the market All this class distinction stuff are part of Marx's inane ramblings

This is not the case. The Wikipedia definition for capitalism is well cited.

Then knock out the front wall of your home, put up a sign, and boom - you're now part of this magical "class" of business owners.

Yes, there is absolutely the ability to move between classes. The use of classes in the context of this definition of capitalism is to give a broad overview of how a capitalist society is structured. In your example, owning the house and stock they sell would be considered "capital". If they were to employ an assistant, to tidy up or help sell stock (which the assistant doesn't own) then the assistant would not own their means of production. Making the assistant a "worker".

Some people even just set up tables outside their house and sell whatever they happen to like making or growing. And this isn't some vague ideal. In many nations throughout the world today this is still very much the reality, and it's awesome.

But it's not capitalism. Hence the definition I provided.

Returning to this bit:

All this class distinction stuff are part of Marx's inane ramblings.

I think shows your true colours. Economists might respectfully disagree with Marx or his ideas, but to call them inane is just ignorance.

Yeah, I know.

This misinterpretation is all over this thread.

"Capitalism is an economic system based on the private ownership of the means of production and their operation for profit."

I wish people would do some cursory research before trying to argue about it.

"The US has rapidly transitioned towards becoming quite anti-capitalist."

What you're describing is distinctly capitalist.

"Pure capitalism is defined as a system wherein all of the means of production (physical capital) are privately owned and run by the capitalist class for a profit, while most other people are workers who work for a salary or wage (and who do not own the capital or the product)."

This has nothing to do with how easy it is for someone to acquire capital in the ways you're describing. In fact that it is difficult to enter the capitalist class only emphasises that there is a difference between them and the worker class (i.e. capitalism).

What would be the point in separating those ideas, when capitalism is the one that's the biggest problem?

You're arguing semantics.

It's a no-true-Scotsman as any market with a monopoly just wasn't "free" enough.

Only because they've bought their way into that position.

"And, yet, none of it seems to have much to do with functionalism, with staying alive and certainly not with industries I would say."

That's exactly what the quote says. You're being very uncharitable with your interpretation.

I'm fuzzy on the details, but there's legal precedent for suing someone for reproducing your code even if they haven't copied any of it.

It's weird how someone like this always pops up when someone complains about customer service.

"Aha, you fool! You have obstructed my right of way and now you must die."

People in the US cover more miles more often. The UK is only small.

>even court cases against the government

I mean, that was basically the extent of it though. There has been little-to-no actual systemic change.

It always surprises me the amount of woo commenters here are willing to swallow.

According to Wikipedia the "Red Book" was written during an odd time for Jung:

>Biographers and critics have disagreed whether these years in Jung's life should be seen as "a creative illness", a period of introspection, a psychotic break, or simply madness.

Which makes me wonder about the context of what you heard in school. By that I mean people seem to agree that what Jung wrote makes sense to a lot of people, so there's something of worth in there. What it doesn't make it is scientific. There's not a lot of people currently arriving at the same conclusions as Jung.

I'll admit I don't know anything about psychology (just what I've heard second hand), but I do find people like Jung quite interesting.

It's worth noting that modern psychology hasn't found any scientific backing for Jung's theories. I think most people consider it an interesting part of psychology's history, but not actually useful.

Over-criminalization is a byproduct of a for-profit prison system.

Why?

As long as they're not doing it violently.

I also have a lot of saved music as I tend to save whole albums instead of tracks. If I find an artist I like and want to listen to later, I'll often save their most popular album to come back to. It all adds up pretty quickly.