User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 6/14/2009 4:58:28 PM EDT
[#1]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You just have to find some loser who desperately needs cash. Why is someone who has been caught up in the fallout from a made to order "financial crisis" necessarily a "loser"? You don't get "caught up in the fallout". That's Clintoon liberal lawyer speak, like "enhanced interrogation techniques" instead of torture. You either make your payments or are a loser and don't. A couple points (I apologize in advance for all the mixed metaphors): I think there is a middle ground between being a "victim" and getting hit by a truck and surviving. What separates a victim from a survivor is what they do after they experience misfortune. Do they pull themselves up by their bootstraps or wait for a govt bailout? A person who suffers hard times and has to sell some valuable items for cash consideration is not a loser-unless he has run out of "cake" to eat. Also, I believe it would be conservative lawyers (along with perhaps most members of this forum) who would use the term "enhanced interrogation techniques" instead of torture. 
Let me clarify. A person who leveraged themselves up with rifles thinking they were going to appreciate like the CA housing industry did in '05 is a L-O-S-E-R. Someone who sells his rifle to pay for the mortgage is not a loser. If I've used to term before, it's to stereotype someone who bought into the height of a bubble thinking they could pass off their asset to the next sucker for a killin', and somehow confusing the idea of sitting on your ass making money on a non-productive asset with the thesis of capitalism. As for lawyers being conservative and using that term, it's a liberal tactic to use PC terms to "soften" another term. It doesn't matter whether the issue plays to conservatives or to liberals. It's Clintoon style tactics. Also, I consider myself a Paleoconservative and would never consider using something like this term to mean something else. Just like "surge" instead of troop escalation. It's politically correct BS. I don't know. Speculating on the future or continued appreciation of assets is a cornerstone of capitalism. Bad timing is just that-it doesn't make a person a loser. And to me, sitting on my ass making money on an ("non-productive" is too judgemental a term and assumes what it proposes to prove) asset is the substitution of brain power for physical labor-a concept well encompassed by my definintion of capitalism. Also on the topic of defined terms, I feel your frustration, but I do think there are differing standards of treatment of prisoners that are not adequately covered by the term "torture". I won't dwelve into the subject of torture anymore as it gets too political, and paleo-conservatives like myself have a huge beef with "conservative" neocons (and we don't need to go there). Speculating is a factor of capitalism, but it certainly is not the cornerstone of capitalism. Capitalism is centered around productivity, not speculation. Factories produce widgets and inventors develop ways of building better widgets by spending cash or obtaining credit. Those people contribute more to the concept of capitalism than some shmuck hoping to make a quick buck sitting on his ass and selling his car/house/painting/AK/AR to the next sucker. If someone makes money off of holding onto a rifle, that's fine and I wouldn't get in the way of it. However, it's NOT the cornerstone of capitalism, IMHO. Speculation is little different than betting on black at your favorite roulette wheel. In fact, I'd rather do the latter because I wouldn't have to wait several years to see if I made money. Never mind the fact that it's not legal to resell rifles en masse as a non FFL. Those who bought WASRs hoping to "flip" them got what they deserve, and I won't shed one tear for those losers (now I'm using the term properly)  Thanks for the discussion Choobie. I will do a little paleo vs neo research to be more informed. My pleasure! 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/14/2009 10:33:09 PM EDT
[#2]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: You just have to find some loser who desperately needs cash. Why is someone who has been caught up in the fallout from a made to order "financial crisis" necessarily a "loser"? You don't get "caught up in the fallout". That's Clintoon liberal lawyer speak, like "enhanced interrogation techniques" instead of torture. You either make your payments or are a loser and don't. A couple points (I apologize in advance for all the mixed metaphors): I think there is a middle ground between being a "victim" and getting hit by a truck and surviving. What separates a victim from a survivor is what they do after they experience misfortune. Do they pull themselves up by their bootstraps or wait for a govt bailout? A person who suffers hard times and has to sell some valuable items for cash consideration is not a loser-unless he has run out of "cake" to eat. Also, I believe it would be conservative lawyers (along with perhaps most members of this forum) who would use the term "enhanced interrogation techniques" instead of torture. Let me clarify. A person who leveraged themselves up with rifles thinking they were going to appreciate like the CA housing industry did in '05 is a L-O-S-E-R. Someone who sells his rifle to pay for the mortgage is not a loser. If I've used to term before, it's to stereotype someone who bought into the height of a bubble thinking they could pass off their asset to the next sucker for a killin', and somehow confusing the idea of sitting on your ass making money on a non-productive asset with the thesis of capitalism. As for lawyers being conservative and using that term, it's a liberal tactic to use PC terms to "soften" another term. It doesn't matter whether the issue plays to conservatives or to liberals. It's Clintoon style tactics. Also, I consider myself a Paleoconservative and would never consider using something like this term to mean something else. Just like "surge" instead of troop escalation. It's politically correct BS. I don't know. Speculating on the future or continued appreciation of assets is a cornerstone of capitalism. Bad timing is just that-it doesn't make a person a loser. And to me, sitting on my ass making money on an ("non-productive" is too judgemental a term and assumes what it proposes to prove) asset is the substitution of brain power for physical labor-a concept well encompassed by my definintion of capitalism. Also on the topic of defined terms, I feel your frustration, but I do think there are differing standards of treatment of prisoners that are not adequately covered by the term "torture". I won't dwelve into the subject of torture anymore as it gets too political, and paleo-conservatives like myself have a huge beef with "conservative" neocons (and we don't need to go there). Speculating is a factor of capitalism, but it certainly is not the cornerstone of capitalism. Capitalism is centered around productivity, not speculation. Factories produce widgets and inventors develop ways of building better widgets by spending cash or obtaining credit. Those people contribute more to the concept of capitalism than some shmuck hoping to make a quick buck sitting on his ass and selling his car/house/painting/AK/AR to the next sucker. If someone makes money off of holding onto a rifle, that's fine and I wouldn't get in the way of it. However, it's NOT the cornerstone of capitalism, IMHO. Speculation is little different than betting on black at your favorite roulette wheel. In fact, I'd rather do the latter because I wouldn't have to wait several years to see if I made money. Never mind the fact that it's not legal to resell rifles en masse as a non FFL. Those who bought WASRs hoping to "flip" them got what they deserve, and I won't shed one tear for those losers (now I'm using the term properly) the main idea of capitalism is not the actual production of goods, but of private ownership. to capitalize on your ability to produce goods, services, or benefits for buyers. the definition of the word capitalize says it all - to draw advantages from. communism however, is based on productivity! how productive are you comrade? thanks a bunch. i sold a wasr i purchased at $250 for $550. i sold some e.g. 5.45 mags that i purchased at $6 for $30. i also sold some chinese ammo that i bought last year for .10 a round for .65 a round on gunbroker in january. made a killing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/15/2009 4:09:26 AM EDT
[#3]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You just have to find some loser who desperately needs cash. Why is someone who has been caught up in the fallout from a made to order "financial crisis" necessarily a "loser"? You don't get "caught up in the fallout". That's Clintoon liberal lawyer speak, like "enhanced interrogation techniques" instead of torture. You either make your payments or are a loser and don't. A couple points (I apologize in advance for all the mixed metaphors): I think there is a middle ground between being a "victim" and getting hit by a truck and surviving. What separates a victim from a survivor is what they do after they experience misfortune. Do they pull themselves up by their bootstraps or wait for a govt bailout? A person who suffers hard times and has to sell some valuable items for cash consideration is not a loser-unless he has run out of "cake" to eat. Also, I believe it would be conservative lawyers (along with perhaps most members of this forum) who would use the term "enhanced interrogation techniques" instead of torture.
Let me clarify. A person who leveraged themselves up with rifles thinking they were going to appreciate like the CA housing industry did in '05 is a L-O-S-E-R. Someone who sells his rifle to pay for the mortgage is not a loser. If I've used to term before, it's to stereotype someone who bought into the height of a bubble thinking they could pass off their asset to the next sucker for a killin', and somehow confusing the idea of sitting on your ass making money on a non-productive asset with the thesis of capitalism. As for lawyers being conservative and using that term, it's a liberal tactic to use PC terms to "soften" another term. It doesn't matter whether the issue plays to conservatives or to liberals. It's Clintoon style tactics. Also, I consider myself a Paleoconservative and would never consider using something like this term to mean something else. Just like "surge" instead of troop escalation. It's politically correct BS. I don't know. Speculating on the future or continued appreciation of assets is a cornerstone of capitalism. Bad timing is just that-it doesn't make a person a loser. And to me, sitting on my ass making money on an ("non-productive" is too judgemental a term and assumes what it proposes to prove) asset is the substitution of brain power for physical labor-a concept well encompassed by my definintion of capitalism. Also on the topic of defined terms, I feel your frustration, but I do think there are differing standards of treatment of prisoners that are not adequately covered by the term "torture". I won't dwelve into the subject of torture anymore as it gets too political, and paleo-conservatives like myself have a huge beef with "conservative" neocons (and we don't need to go there). Speculating is a factor of capitalism, but it certainly is not the cornerstone of capitalism. Capitalism is centered around productivity, not speculation. Factories produce widgets and inventors develop ways of building better widgets by spending cash or obtaining credit. Those people contribute more to the concept of capitalism than some shmuck hoping to make a quick buck sitting on his ass and selling his car/house/painting/AK/AR to the next sucker. If someone makes money off of holding onto a rifle, that's fine and I wouldn't get in the way of it. However, it's NOT the cornerstone of capitalism, IMHO. Speculation is little different than betting on black at your favorite roulette wheel. In fact, I'd rather do the latter because I wouldn't have to wait several years to see if I made money. Never mind the fact that it's not legal to resell rifles en masse as a non FFL. Those who bought WASRs hoping to "flip" them got what they deserve, and I won't shed one tear for those losers (now I'm using the term properly) the main idea of capitalism is not the actual production of goods, but of private ownership. to capitalize on your ability to produce goods, services, or benefits for buyers. the definition of the word capitalize says it all - to draw advantages from. communism however, is based on productivity! how productive are you comrade? thanks a bunch. i sold a wasr i purchased at $250 for $550. i sold some e.g. 5.45 mags that i purchased at $6 for $30. i also sold some chinese ammo that i bought last year for .10 a round for .65 a round on gunbroker in january. made a killing. Don't confuse productivity for the State (Communism) for productivity for profits and accumulation of wealth. Private ownership is a tenet of a free society, but is not directly associated with capitalism nor does it improve the quality of life for society, and indirect benefit of true capitalism. It merely corrupts minds into thinking there's a ticket to EZ street. Hasn't anyone here learned from the housing crash, or are you all holding onto houses that have lost a substantial amount of value, hoping and praying for a comeback? (hint: it ain't gonna happen) Productivity improves the lives of society and brings the cost of goods down in the long run. It actually delivers on the promise than communism could never hope to accomplish. One reason why the US is screwed economically (and why inversely China is eating our lunch) for at least the next decade is folks like yourself who adopt the mentality that profits are somehow owed to them like a welfare check, just because you bought a pretty toy and sat on it. Considering that some here on ARFCOM are card carrying union members, I find it rich to think that I'm somehow the commie. How's that, Comrade? 
I find nothing wrong with enjoying the fruits of appreciation over the long run. It's the short term flipping mentality that bothers me, and it's little different than a liberal wanting their welfare check they think is owed to them. People who think it's douchebaggery to feel schadenfreude are a fine bunch as well, talking big about capitalism but then asking people to "have a heart" for those who are on the losing end. Pathetic. I find it despicable that you'd even try to make an association between my desire for a productive economy that rewards the risk of investing capital and communism. I'm also VERY PLEASED that people who bought WASRs for $600+ are getting toasty crispy burned right now. It'll teach them to not be short sighted in their investments. But, congrats to your profits. My WASR is SPF over this weekend but most would've laughed at a $550 price tag, so it had to go for $470 –– shipped. A substantial drop but I'm not sweating it because I didn't buy dozens of them hoping to quickly flip for profit. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
