Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Op Ed

Cliffski's Blog - Kickstarting inequality.
Kickstarter is the absolute poster-child for inequality amongst gamers, based on income. Now I am definitely not a raging socialist, but I know a lot of gamers are, and I find it a bit weird that it doesn’t bug them that when these kickstarter games ship, not only will gamers with more money that them be swanning around with better outfits and weapons, (This already happens in F2P games), but some of the NPC’s will have the names of the ‘wealthy’ backers. Some will even have their digitized faces in the game. Elite is actually naming PLANETS after people who back the game with a lot of money.

Gamers say they hate in-game product placement and advertising. It compromises the game design for the sake of money. I agree. So why are we deciding that the best way to name our planets or design the appearance of our NPC’s is to put that part of game design up for auction? Why should gamers who are wealthy get more influence over a game that those who flip burgers for a living? The cold hard economic reality of the real world is bad enough without shoehorning it into games too.

View
104 Replies. 6 pages. Viewing page 2.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 ] Older >

84. Re: Op Ed Nov 25, 2012, 17:57 Krizzen
 
My two cents on the summary (didn't bother with the article):

"Kickstarter is the absolute poster-child for inequality amongst gamers, based on income"

Perhaps. Contrast kickstarter campaigns to big name DLC -- on kickstarter, you typically get a copy of the entire game for a realistic price, and on the other hand gaming megacorps are happy to continually ream customers beyond their initial $60 purchase, if only to "keep up with the Joneses".

"Now I am definitely not a raging socialist, but I know a lot of gamers are ..."

Whoa, raging socialists? I'd say most gamers are raging anarchists before that.

"Elite is actually naming PLANETS after people who back the game with a lot of money."

Oh my! News flash: things have been named after rich and powerful people for thousands of years.

"So why are we deciding that the best way to name our planets or design the appearance of our NPC’s is to put that part of game design up for auction?"

This actually raises a good point. I haven't seen this happen yet, but imagine someone like Pepsi buying some top-tier kickstarter slots, naming things like towns in an RPG "Pepsiville" or the like. I know that's a bit absurd and most developers wouldn't let things get that far, but it's interesting whether such commercialization is prevented via Kickstarter's legal agreements (or that they should be!).

Anyway, I read the summary as "They Don't Name Supercars after Poor People".
 
Avatar 57568
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
83. Re: Op Ed Nov 25, 2012, 17:54 Axis
 
Nucas wrote on Nov 25, 2012, 17:48:
Axis wrote on Nov 25, 2012, 17:29:
IRS data proves the rich pay 4 times the percentage rate compared to middle class earners.
you keep saying this like you're making a devastating point but i must ask, "so?" it's very difficult to trudge through your barely concealed superiority and i am engaging you just because i feel someone should, lest you think you "won" and not that everyone else here is just tired of your conceited bullshit.

ps. CELEBRATE JOB CREATORS

Yo man, it was Cutter who started the conceited "everyone is delusional in America" shit like always. Spouting that socialism is nothing more than the rich paying their fair share.

Yes, I proved he and his lapdogs are full of fucking shit. And the only reason you guys are pissed is because its in your fucking faces and undeniable.

I'm the one tired of the bullshit, and I'm doing something about it.
 
Avatar 57462
 
Yours truly,

Axis
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
82. Re: Op Ed Nov 25, 2012, 17:54 Flatline
 
Axis wrote on Nov 25, 2012, 16:19:
What matters is the FACT that Cutter (and most of you liberals) think socialism is "rich paying fair share". What's also FACT is the IRS records indicating the rich pay 4x more than the middle class.

The rich may pay 4 times the middle class, but they make, pretty much by definition, 5-10 times minimum what the middle class makes (average household income being 50k a year, and the average "middle class" salary is 27k a year, and the definition of the top 5% of income is around 250k a year). So... yeah... fair share.

But the IRS tax code isn't about fair share, it's about equal burden. What I pay at 50k is supposed to "hurt" about as much as someone who makes 20 million a year. The number will be different, but the intent is to have equal burdens across the field. If you make 20 million a year (like Mittens), paying 15k a year in taxes is unnoticeable except in an empirical way. I feel that 15k a year on my 50k a year salary quite a bit. On someone who makes 25k a year, 15k in taxes would be crushing, to the point where you couldn't really live.

So, someone who makes 25k a year will pay around 5k in taxes total and feel it. I'll pay 15 and feel it, and Mittens, if the system worked as intended, should probably pay around 10 million to feel the same burden.

Or, if you go by the Eisenhower tax rates, he should be paying about 19 million in taxes on that 20 million dollar income.

Edit: Let's also not forget that the commons cost money to run too. What are the commons? Our legal system (both criminal and civil), state, local, and federal governments, our roads, our airways, emergency services, and so on and so forth. Wealth people, and I'm talking about the top 1% and higher, the people who make immense amounts of money, *constantly* use the commons. Whether it's using the civil system and state and county and city government for real estate, the regulated and functioning stock exchange system, or just the ability to safely defend themselves in a court of law, they use the commons *constantly*, and they use them at the highest levels and most expensive functions. It's only fair that they contribute more to the infrastructure that helped make them wealthy.

Unless, of course, you're an Ayn Rand-bot who believes the commons actually hurt business and man, in which case I will (seriously!) offer you a one-way plane ticket to Botswana where there are no commons and no government intervention, and you'll be free to create your fortune there as Nature intended it. Caveat: You're not allowed to bring anything with you. Clothes on your back, your passport, and 20 dollars cash. That's it. A true tycoon of business should be able to create a fortune in no time.

This comment was edited on Nov 25, 2012, 18:02.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
81. Re: Op Ed Nov 25, 2012, 17:48 Nucas
 
Axis wrote on Nov 25, 2012, 17:29:
IRS data proves the rich pay 4 times the percentage rate compared to middle class earners.
you keep saying this like you're making a devastating point but i must ask, "so?" it's very difficult to trudge through your barely concealed superiority and i am engaging you just because i feel someone should, lest you think you "won" and not that everyone else here is just tired of your conceited bullshit.

ps. CELEBRATE JOB CREATORS
 
Avatar 49584
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
80. Re: Op Ed Nov 25, 2012, 17:37 Axis
 
Kosumo wrote on Nov 25, 2012, 17:26:
That is a big document with lots of numbers, I'm not gonna read it all (76 Pages) could you point to the part dealing with where you get that concultion please?

Cmon man, I'm not here to do everyone's homework

Starts on page 6. Average Tax rate. There's even some better stats there if you know about deductions and credits and how much more it helps the middle class percentage but not the wealthy. Just trying to stay on target, these guys are easily confused and not as 'wherewithal' as they pretend to be.
 
Avatar 57462
 
Yours truly,

Axis
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
79. Re: Op Ed Nov 25, 2012, 17:29 Axis
 
Suppa quit trying to impress yourself, seriously. Your paragraphs amount to "most humans cannot think like I do".

Don't get me wrong, you have made some points. But no one is listening, most can't even digest two small sentences:

Liberals (cutter's lapdogs anyway) think "rich paying more" is what socialism is.

IRS data proves the rich pay 4 times the percentage rate compared to middle class earners.
 
Avatar 57462
 
Yours truly,

Axis
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
78. Re: Op Ed Nov 25, 2012, 17:26 Kosumo
 
That is a big document with lots of numbers, I'm not gonna read it all (76 Pages) could you point to the part dealing with where you get that concultion please?  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
77. Re: Op Ed Nov 25, 2012, 17:20 Suppa7
 
Axis wrote on Nov 25, 2012, 14:29:
I posted something simple, factual, data-backed, easy to follow.

That's where you're incorrect, if you understood the history of war and commerce you would never make such an assertion.

I'll take one example: The infinite extension of Copyright, because market participants have unequal market power they change and buy laws and propagandize (raise children up in a certain way) to transform societies values to accept the laws they themselves bought and were criticized/resisted by the more intelligent half of the population. But because these people are a minority and the great masses of mankind tend to not be very bright. Bad laws and all sorts of loop-holes and rent seeking are easily passed into law because money and political power are the same thing, a means to get what you want.

The problem is not a question of fairness, the problem is that you are too engaged in your own hatred and strong feelings in your own politics and you need to step away from them and people of all political stripes and look for the truth yourself. That means a lot of reading and decades of study few human beings are capable of.

You need to step away from the society and era in which you exist and examine many different periods of history of war and commerce far removed from the present time to have an accurate picture of the world.

While you're engaged in hatred of a specific political group, elites are getting away with huge crimes.

If you have any morality at all you'd know that the problems are the elites and there is a need for accountability in both the corporate and government sector but the mass media has so stirred the world up into a political frenzy that it's just easier to hate other people then to build bridges and make criminals accountable.

Popular points of view that are prominent and talked about are suspect because elites always use the divide and conquer strategy against their population when they want to get away with serious crimes.

If you're whipped up against someone that means you're already under their spell, they misdirect your energy for their own benefit.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJqM2tFOxLQ
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
76. Re: Op Ed Nov 25, 2012, 17:14 Axis
 
Kosumo wrote on Nov 25, 2012, 17:08:
When you say 'pay 4x more tax' do you mean they pay like 4 million dollars while the working class on pay 1 million or do you mean they are taxed at %40 while the working class is taxed at %10?

Can you clear that up for me?

Average tax rate. Taken right from the IRS tax return data released a few days ago. Middle classers (30-50k) average 4.8%. Millionaires (1mil+) 20.4%.

Here:

irs tax return statistics


Liberals can't stomach it because of all the Romney and Buffet propaganda eaten the last year.
 
Avatar 57462
 
Yours truly,

Axis
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
75. Re: Op Ed Nov 25, 2012, 17:08 Kosumo
 
When you say 'pay 4x more tax' do you mean they pay like 4 million dollars while the working class on pay 1 million or do you mean they are taxed at %40 while the working class is taxed at %10?

Can you clear that up for me?
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
74. Re: Op Ed Nov 25, 2012, 16:59 Sepharo
 
Axis wrote on Nov 25, 2012, 16:19:
Draugr wrote on Nov 25, 2012, 15:32:
Axis wrote on Nov 25, 2012, 14:13:

IRS DATA GENIUS. What more PROOF do you need Mr. In Denial?

Wow...

I hope you know yelling 'IRS DATA' without actually saying anything makes you look more like an ignoramous, This Data shows us tax rates. That is all.
Your appeal to authority with those editorials really goes to prove *no* points that your trying to make. It shows that this fellow seems to think rich people are being taxed enough already, but that doesn't really have much to do with socialism. Unless of course you think having tax rates similar to what we had during the 50's would make us socialist.

I'm not questioning the IRS data. I'm questioning the conclusions they have drawn (I'd say you, but you're essentially asking me to argue with a surrogate, presumably because you have no arguments of your own to make) which is basically an implied argument that taxes are just fine/raising them can resolve nothing. The REAL argument is if they are paying their fair share, some would say no, some would say yes - BUT! That has little to do with socialism.
This guys argument boils down to, 'if it isn't a flat-tax rate than it is more than your fare share.' not many would agree with that. (Obviously things like flat tax make sense from a 'common sense' approach. The mistake is to assume that common sense is always helpful. Common sense also would lead you to believe the earth is flat and the sun revolves around the earth.)

Just because you pay more taxes than some doesn't mean your paying a fair share already. If you think some dude making a blog post and talking about how he thinks tax rates are just fine or more than fair is proof of anything -- citing IRS/CBO data or otherwise, then be my guest.

Killer denial statement brohammer!!

What matters is the FACT that Cutter (and most of you liberals) think socialism is "rich paying fair share". What's also FACT is the IRS records indicating the rich pay 4x more than the middle class.

I'll add the FACT that you guys can't believe it, won't believe it, determined to make your own "fairness" doctrine about what working Americans should pay -- because you are so far up pelosi, reeds, and obamas ass of propaganda you can't imagine life anywhere else. And you are the last damn people to tell anyone what they should pay. You don't even believe in hard work, don't believe in capitalism, don't believe in our constitution.

Want my opinion? Most liberals are pessimistic, whiny, needy, lazy, in denial, think they're smart, fake around others, pompous, insecure, and life trolls - that's my only opinion in the matter.

But I have no need to state opinions really. Liberals automatically disregard opinion, and just as often disregard fact. Just as you all have proven right here in this thread.

http://www.neatorama.com/2009/10/05/worlds-largest-paintbrush/
 
Avatar 17249
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
73. Re: Op Ed Nov 25, 2012, 16:19 Axis
 
Draugr wrote on Nov 25, 2012, 15:32:
Axis wrote on Nov 25, 2012, 14:13:

IRS DATA GENIUS. What more PROOF do you need Mr. In Denial?

Wow...

I hope you know yelling 'IRS DATA' without actually saying anything makes you look more like an ignoramous, This Data shows us tax rates. That is all.
Your appeal to authority with those editorials really goes to prove *no* points that your trying to make. It shows that this fellow seems to think rich people are being taxed enough already, but that doesn't really have much to do with socialism. Unless of course you think having tax rates similar to what we had during the 50's would make us socialist.

I'm not questioning the IRS data. I'm questioning the conclusions they have drawn (I'd say you, but you're essentially asking me to argue with a surrogate, presumably because you have no arguments of your own to make) which is basically an implied argument that taxes are just fine/raising them can resolve nothing. The REAL argument is if they are paying their fair share, some would say no, some would say yes - BUT! That has little to do with socialism.
This guys argument boils down to, 'if it isn't a flat-tax rate than it is more than your fare share.' not many would agree with that. (Obviously things like flat tax make sense from a 'common sense' approach. The mistake is to assume that common sense is always helpful. Common sense also would lead you to believe the earth is flat and the sun revolves around the earth.)

Just because you pay more taxes than some doesn't mean your paying a fair share already. If you think some dude making a blog post and talking about how he thinks tax rates are just fine or more than fair is proof of anything -- citing IRS/CBO data or otherwise, then be my guest.

Killer denial statement brohammer!!

What matters is the FACT that Cutter (and most of you liberals) think socialism is "rich paying fair share". What's also FACT is the IRS records indicating the rich pay 4x more than the middle class.

I'll add the FACT that you guys can't believe it, won't believe it, determined to make your own "fairness" doctrine about what working Americans should pay -- because you are so far up pelosi, reeds, and obamas ass of propaganda you can't imagine life anywhere else. And you are the last damn people to tell anyone what they should pay. You don't even believe in hard work, don't believe in capitalism, don't believe in our constitution.

Want my opinion? Most liberals are pessimistic, whiny, needy, lazy, in denial, think they're smart, fake around others, pompous, insecure, and life trolls - that's my only opinion in the matter.

But I have no need to state opinions really. Liberals automatically disregard opinion, and just as often disregard fact. Just as you all have proven right here in this thread.

 
Avatar 57462
 
Yours truly,

Axis
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
72. Re: Op Ed Nov 25, 2012, 15:32 Draugr
 
Axis wrote on Nov 25, 2012, 14:13:

IRS DATA GENIUS. What more PROOF do you need Mr. In Denial?

Wow...

I hope you know yelling 'IRS DATA' without actually saying anything makes you look more like an ignoramous, This Data shows us tax rates. That is all.
Your appeal to authority with those editorials really goes to prove *no* points that your trying to make. It shows that this fellow seems to think rich people are being taxed enough already, but that doesn't really have much to do with socialism. Unless of course you think having tax rates similar to what we had during the 50's would make us socialist.

I'm not questioning the IRS data. I'm questioning the conclusions they have drawn (I'd say you, but you're essentially asking me to argue with a surrogate, presumably because you have no arguments of your own to make) which is basically an implied argument that taxes are just fine/raising them can resolve nothing. The REAL argument is if they are paying their fair share, some would say no, some would say yes - BUT! That has little to do with socialism.
This guys argument boils down to, 'if it isn't a flat-tax rate than it is more than your fare share.' not many would agree with that. (Obviously things like flat tax make sense from a 'common sense' approach. The mistake is to assume that common sense is always helpful. Common sense also would lead you to believe the earth is flat and the sun revolves around the earth.)

Just because you pay more taxes than some doesn't mean your paying a fair share already. If you think some dude making a blog post and talking about how he thinks tax rates are just fine or more than fair is proof of anything -- citing IRS/CBO data or otherwise, then be my guest.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
71. Re: Op Ed Nov 25, 2012, 14:29 Axis
 
Suppa7 wrote on Nov 25, 2012, 14:24:
Axis wrote on Nov 25, 2012, 13:48:
Pretty simple stuff. Lets see if you can comprehend a summary:

1. Cutter says socialism is rich people paying their fair share (which is insanely wrong, but I took it for the simple and uneducated view many of you take).

2. I link undeniable proof that the rich in America pay 4 times what the average middle class pays. Not what I say, but what a liberal cesspool of news reports from factual IRS data.

Make any sense yet, or got some more neanderthal doltish attacks?

Like I said before if you were interested in truth instead of pushing your beliefs you'd try to actively undermine what you think you know by asking questions: How could this worldview be wrong?

That kind of question is beyond you, intelligent people have a natural uncertainty because they know how complex the world really is and overconfidence in ideology is evidence of intellectual weakness and lack of education.

I don't accept anyone's ideology or values since I'm aware that the human mind is not especially good at perceiving reality.
You should learn a bit about how your mind actually reasons first.

Once you actually understand that you will step back from all ideologies and ask questions like: If I was deceiving myself, how would I go about developing tools and techniques to debunk oversimplified narratives in a complex world?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYmi0DLzBdQ

I posted something simple, factual, data-backed, easy to follow.

You post self indulging monolog dribble, obviously incapable of understanding the very simple fact laid before you in context of our conversation.

Easier summary for you: Socialism is not "rich paying fair shares", and rich in America pay 4 times what the middle class pay.
 
Avatar 57462
 
Yours truly,

Axis
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
70. Re: Op Ed Nov 25, 2012, 14:24 Suppa7
 
Axis wrote on Nov 25, 2012, 13:48:
Pretty simple stuff. Lets see if you can comprehend a summary:

1. Cutter says socialism is rich people paying their fair share (which is insanely wrong, but I took it for the simple and uneducated view many of you take).

2. I link undeniable proof that the rich in America pay 4 times what the average middle class pays. Not what I say, but what a liberal cesspool of news reports from factual IRS data.

Make any sense yet, or got some more neanderthal doltish attacks?

Like I said before if you were interested in truth instead of pushing your beliefs you'd try to actively undermine what you think you know by asking questions: How could this worldview be wrong?

That kind of question is beyond you, intelligent people have a natural uncertainty because they know how complex the world really is and overconfidence in ideology is evidence of intellectual weakness and lack of education.

I don't accept anyone's ideology or values since I'm aware that the human mind is not especially good at perceiving reality.
You should learn a bit about how your mind actually reasons first.

Once you actually understand that you will step back from all ideologies and ask questions like: If I was deceiving myself, how would I go about developing tools and techniques to debunk oversimplified narratives in a complex world?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYmi0DLzBdQ
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
69. Re: Op Ed Nov 25, 2012, 14:22 Axis
 
Draugr wrote on Nov 25, 2012, 14:20:
Axis wrote on Nov 25, 2012, 14:01:
Draugr wrote on Nov 25, 2012, 13:59:
Axis wrote on Nov 25, 2012, 13:31:
daPhoenix wrote on Nov 25, 2012, 13:26:
Axis wrote on Nov 25, 2012, 12:56:
Hilarious how out of touch you guys are, seriously.
You live in the States, I live next to Russia.

I think I know more about socialism than you ever will.

Brainwashing is amazing isn't it -- Works a treat in socialist countries!

The fact that you consider Russia a socialist country shows us all we need when it comes down to your grasp on reality. Next you'll be telling us they are our #1 geopolitical foe!
If anything Russia is the poster child for displaying that Capitalism and freedom are far from synonymous, contrary to what you/most of america has been taught.

You said you lived next to Russia, implying you are from a socialist country or have some magic insight I don't. Do you even bother to read before you post?

Apparently you don't read, otherwise you'd realize me and the person who made that claim aren't the same person.
You presume an (unidentified) country is socialist just because it is in the vicnity of russia? Again you show your lack of understanding of the regions (old USSR) history and political situation.

I was merely pointing out that you can't even properly identify socialist countries. All your supposition seems to ignore the fact that it's not 1980 anymore.

Shhh shhh... go read IRS data and speak less.

You, he, who cares. Same poop in the shoot, different nugget.
 
Avatar 57462
 
Yours truly,

Axis
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
68. Re: Op Ed Nov 25, 2012, 14:20 Draugr
 
Axis wrote on Nov 25, 2012, 14:01:
Draugr wrote on Nov 25, 2012, 13:59:
Axis wrote on Nov 25, 2012, 13:31:
daPhoenix wrote on Nov 25, 2012, 13:26:
Axis wrote on Nov 25, 2012, 12:56:
Hilarious how out of touch you guys are, seriously.
You live in the States, I live next to Russia.

I think I know more about socialism than you ever will.

Brainwashing is amazing isn't it -- Works a treat in socialist countries!

The fact that you consider Russia a socialist country shows us all we need when it comes down to your grasp on reality. Next you'll be telling us they are our #1 geopolitical foe!
If anything Russia is the poster child for displaying that Capitalism and freedom are far from synonymous, contrary to what you/most of america has been taught.

You said you lived next to Russia, implying you are from a socialist country or have some magic insight I don't. Do you even bother to read before you post?

Apparently you don't read, otherwise you'd realize me and the person who made that claim aren't the same person.
You presume an (unidentified) country is socialist just because it is in the vicnity of russia? Again you show your lack of understanding of the regions (old USSR) history and political situation.

I was merely pointing out that you can't even properly identify socialist countries. All your supposition seems to ignore the fact that it's not 1980 anymore.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
67. Re: Op Ed Nov 25, 2012, 14:15 Axis
 
Sepharo wrote on Nov 25, 2012, 14:07:
Axis wrote on Nov 25, 2012, 14:00:
Sepharo wrote on Nov 25, 2012, 13:56:

1. Do you understand that the rich in America pay their far share seph? Read the proof I linked, then answer.

2. I can name dozens.

3. None of it will make sense to you if you cannot comprehend #1.

4. You start. Name something substantial that taught you about socialism, it's history, or its current implementation and affect.

5. It's all socialism with you eh?

6. I was just wondering what history books you've read.

7. Right now I'm reading the The Dark Tower VII. It's taken me forever to get through the series because I read a few chapters before I go to sleep and then I drop my phone on my face.

Exactly the reason I didn't bother with you.

And the Dark Tower series owns. I won't lib out on you and post a spoiler.

I don't understand why I have to answer a bunch of riddles just to find out what you're reading. If I don't understand certain online editorials before you reveal just one of your favorite history books will the revelation melt my face?

Ok ok... here: History of...
 
Avatar 57462
 
Yours truly,

Axis
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
66. Re: Op Ed Nov 25, 2012, 14:13 Axis
 
Draugr wrote on Nov 25, 2012, 14:10:
Axis wrote on Nov 25, 2012, 13:50:
1. Do you understand that the rich in America pay their far share seph? Read the proof I linked, then answer.

4. You start. Name something substantial that taught you about socialism, it's history, or its current implementation and affect.


1. This is like that time Mitt Romney said he had Studies that showed that his budget works - and just like in that case, what he was talking about wasn't academic research or proof at all, they were essentially blog posts. If you need a blog post to prove your point, you've lost.

4.) No, you start, the challenge was issued to you. But I guess you can't list any history books. Considering you use editorial posts as 'proof' doesn't make this surprising at all.

IRS DATA GENIUS. What more PROOF do you need Mr. In Denial?

Wow...
 
Avatar 57462
 
Yours truly,

Axis
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
65. Re: Op Ed Nov 25, 2012, 14:10 Draugr
 
Axis wrote on Nov 25, 2012, 13:50:
1. Do you understand that the rich in America pay their far share seph? Read the proof I linked, then answer.

4. You start. Name something substantial that taught you about socialism, it's history, or its current implementation and affect.


1. This is like that time Mitt Romney said he had Studies that showed that his budget works - and just like in that case, what he was talking about wasn't academic research or proof at all, they were essentially blog posts. If you need a blog post to prove your point, you've lost.

4.) No, you start, the challenge was issued to you. But I guess you can't list any history books. Considering you use editorial posts as 'proof' doesn't make this surprising at all.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
104 Replies. 6 pages. Viewing page 2.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 ] Older >


footer

.. .. ..

Blue's News logo