User Controls
The nogging continues
-
2023-11-25 at 3:35 PM UTC
Originally posted by infinityshock youre either member of the kike subspecies or mongoloid subspecies. theyre the only ones mentally defective enough to justify such drivel. your outlook is based on the usury and debt-based economy that is entirely too prevalent in todays society. you using the term 'capital' to define a food item…a necessity to survival and existence…is an example of your degenerate juden thought process. this is part of why modern society is so fucked.
ALL economy is debt based. debt was created when they started to switch trading from using perishable medium of exchange (money) to using non-perishable medium of exchange.
someone has to expend all those effort of mining, pandering, refining, smelting and casting all those precious metal into "money" all while sustaining himself with food and drinks that had not been acquired with his newly minted "money".
the first batch of non-perishable money was made in credit. without credit there can not be money, and without money there aint got no economy.using your example, yes, ancient farmers…as in sumerian/mesopamian times, not 'pre-historic' as in times where there are no records (written or oral)…would acquire resources outside of their means. the records of exactly your example are found on many…countless…clay tablets written in cuneiform. firstly, they didnt have money. they bartered or used actual tangibles as the means of exchange…such as 'bundles' of wheat…'bunches' of fish…etc. they didnt have weights. 'shekels' were where they sorta kinda started to weigh things.
uber simplified example: if a farmer needed more resources than he had available he'd go to family members first, then 'neighbors', or then wealthy members of the city or merchants. then theyd make an arrangement about what the 'lender' would provide then once the crop was harvested, such as how much of that crop would be given to the lender as repayment for his (or rarely her) INVESTMENT. this was all 'written' down on a clay tablet as a binding contract. regarding the 'barely competent' farmer…that farmer would not be given any investments due to his reputation.
lending your money out tk someone in need is not "investing". its renting. letting someone use your property, be it your second house or your bodily orriffices in exchange for a little fee and some pocket lint is not "investing". its renting.
"investing" and "gambling" involves a whole nother galaxy of criterias that im too tired to type right now. -
2023-11-25 at 3:36 PM UTC
-
2023-11-25 at 4:05 PM UTC
Originally posted by vindicktive vinny im too tired to type right now.
that is the only thing you typed that was accurate
Originally posted by vindicktive vinny ALL economy is debt based. debt was created when they started to switch trading from using perishable medium of exchange (money) to using non-perishable medium of exchange.
someone has to expend all those effort of mining, pandering, refining, smelting and casting all those precious metal into "money" all while sustaining himself with food and drinks that had not been acquired with his newly minted "money".
the first batch of non-perishable money was made in credit. without credit there can not be money, and without money there aint got no economy.
lending your money out tk someone in need is not "investing". its renting. letting someone use your property, be it your second house or your bodily orriffices in exchange for a little fee and some pocket lint is not "investing". its renting.
"investing" and "gambling" involves a whole nother galaxy of criterias that im too tired to type right now.
your economics knowledge is deeply lacking and entirely delusional. the current debt-based economy was created as a means of artificially producing wealth without a commensurate expenditure of effort in applying value.
again...usury is the proper term. usury has been literally illegal for longer in human history than it has been legal.
money, as a means of exchange, has no value. it is a symbol or representation of value.
based on your own statements, you dont have the abstract thought processing capacity to comprehend the simplicities nor the complexities of the functions of a society. the sole function of money is as a means of facilitating the flow and function of a society that is at the stage of complexity where the exchange of simple services and simple product is no longer feasible.
in mesopotamia a farmer could give a basket of his wheat to the owner of the millstone in exchange for the 'rental' of his millstone. a herdsman could exchange an urn of his goat milk to a fisherman in exchange for a fish. they would all give their products to the local 'people in charge' (they didnt have kings yet) for that period of times equivalent in taxation...then that 'government' would dole out those items to the priest or for when it was time for a 'war' to feed the army.
nowadays civilization is exponentially more complex. a modern farmer cant give a builder a bundle of wheat to an employee at the airport for the plane the construction worker built...and everyone driving on a road cant give the manufacturer of a street light a half a shekels* weight worth of whatever came off their farm to drive on the road
the examples i gave were NOT lending...they were investing. usury was not practiced. when a person needed more funds for something than he had available or was able to earn/save up he expressed his venture to other individuals who may have been interested in participating in the venture then eventually...and hopefully...reaping the rewards. again...usury was banned.
another example...in venitian times if a merchant had a good business venture trading, but not enough spare cash, hed proposition one or more people who had money who GAVE that merchant their money with the understanding that upon successful completion of that venture their money would be returned with an additional amount. also with the understanding if the ship hauling that merchandise were sunk in a storm or captured by some mohammedian pirates they all would lose their money and the merchant would have little to no chance of drumming up money ever again. (side note...'drumming' is a term that started when someone with a drum was paid to beat on it in a city center to call attention to an announcement to be made. in this example someone trying to drum-up some money for a business proposition)
if the venture was a success and all the INVESTORS made a profit...that merchant would have a much easier time of finding new INVESTORS for future ventures.
credit is an unnecessary part of any economy and it is falsely represented as a requirement.
*shekel is an ancient definition of measure of weight that the kikes stole in the mid 20th century for their currency. as they steal everything. -
2023-11-25 at 4:06 PM UTC
-
2023-11-26 at 2:22 AM UTC
Originally posted by infinityshock youre either member of the kike subspecies or mongoloid subspecies. theyre the only ones mentally defective enough to justify such drivel. your outlook is based on the usury and debt-based economy that is entirely too prevalent in todays society. you using the term 'capital' to define a food item…a necessity to survival and existence…is an example of your degenerate juden thought process. this is part of why modern society is so fucked.
using your example, yes, ancient farmers…as in sumerian/mesopamian times, not 'pre-historic' as in times where there are no records (written or oral)…would acquire resources outside of their means. the records of exactly your example are found on many…countless…clay tablets written in cuneiform. firstly, they didnt have money. they bartered or used actual tangibles as the means of exchange…such as 'bundles' of wheat…'bunches' of fish…etc. they didnt have weights. 'shekels' were where they sorta kinda started to weigh things.
uber simplified example: if a farmer needed more resources than he had available he'd go to family members first, then 'neighbors', or then wealthy members of the city or merchants. then theyd make an arrangement about what the 'lender' would provide then once the crop was harvested, such as how much of that crop would be given to the lender as repayment for his (or rarely her) INVESTMENT. this was all 'written' down on a clay tablet as a binding contract. regarding the 'barely competent' farmer…that farmer would not be given any investments due to his reputation.
no all that shit is way too complicated just do it the old fashioned way fam
-
2023-11-26 at 2:25 AM UTC
-
2023-11-26 at 8:44 AM UTC
Originally posted by infinityshock that is the only thing you typed that was accurate
your economics knowledge is deeply lacking and entirely delusional. the current debt-based economy was created as a means of artificially producing wealth without a commensurate expenditure of effort in applying value.
again…usury is the proper term. usury has been literally illegal for longer in human history than it has been legal.
money, as a means of exchange, has no value. it is a symbol or representation of value.
based on your own statements, you dont have the abstract thought processing capacity to comprehend the simplicities nor the complexities of the functions of a society. the sole function of money is as a means of facilitating the flow and function of a society that is at the stage of complexity where the exchange of simple services and simple product is no longer feasible.
in mesopotamia a farmer could give a basket of his wheat to the owner of the millstone in exchange for the 'rental' of his millstone. a herdsman could exchange an urn of his goat milk to a fisherman in exchange for a fish. they would all give their products to the local 'people in charge' (they didnt have kings yet) for that period of times equivalent in taxation…then that 'government' would dole out those items to the priest or for when it was time for a 'war' to feed the army.
nowadays civilization is exponentially more complex. a modern farmer cant give a builder a bundle of wheat to an employee at the airport for the plane the construction worker built…and everyone driving on a road cant give the manufacturer of a street light a half a shekels* weight worth of whatever came off their farm to drive on the road
the examples i gave were NOT lending…they were investing. usury was not practiced. when a person needed more funds for something than he had available or was able to earn/save up he expressed his venture to other individuals who may have been interested in participating in the venture then eventually…and hopefully…reaping the rewards. again…usury was banned.
another example…in venitian times if a merchant had a good business venture trading, but not enough spare cash, hed proposition one or more people who had money who GAVE that merchant their money with the understanding that upon successful completion of that venture their money would be returned with an additional amount. also with the understanding if the ship hauling that merchandise were sunk in a storm or captured by some mohammedian pirates they all would lose their money and the merchant would have little to no chance of drumming up money ever again. (side note…'drumming' is a term that started when someone with a drum was paid to beat on it in a city center to call attention to an announcement to be made. in this example someone trying to drum-up some money for a business proposition)
if the venture was a success and all the INVESTORS made a profit…that merchant would have a much easier time of finding new INVESTORS for future ventures.
credit is an unnecessary part of any economy and it is falsely represented as a requirement.
*shekel is an ancient definition of measure of weight that the kikes stole in the mid 20th century for their currency. as they steal everything.
ok, i see what your problem is now.
its obvious you have great difficulties discerning between "investing" and "lending", but its ok, because many uninitiated people also often confuse the differences between lending vs. investing vs gambling.
this is because trying to tell the differences between lending and investing is just as tricky and complex as trying to tell the differences between the crotch of a well-tucked trans woman from the crotch of a genuine human female.
now allow me to peel back the thick box tape that is covering her penis and you'll see the differences immediately.
lending - definition: the acts of borrowing monies to person(s) or entity(ies) for any purposes other than to generate, in theory, a certain income utilizing the money borrowed.
example of lending : mortgages for residential houses and private vehicles. the money lended to families and private citizens to be used to purchase these personal, private properties have no known income generating potential other than their increase in monetary prices due to inflation, ie, adjustment made due to the lost of monetary purchasing power. this kind of activity is has low risk and if given out to credit worthy people, is a form of social service and therefore interest from such lending should be low.
example of lending 2 : borrowing your money to your good friend to purchase dildos.
investing - definition: the acts of borrowing money to person(s) or entity(ies) solely for the purpose to generate in theory, an income from income-generating activities, such as starting up a bussiness, openning a brothel, or importing a bunch of negroes for the purpose of reselling them for a profit.
example of investing: borrowing monies to people and companies to be used as working capitals to scoop up real estates and residential properties solely for the purpose to flip them, that is to say selling them once the prices of the properties they speculate has gone up more than the rate of inflation due to the excessive demand from buyers. this kind of activity is risky and unnecessary and therefore charging a high interest on the money borrowed is reasonable. greed for greed.
example of investing 3: buying a little boy from south east asia and then renting him out for the ussage of his orriffices in exchange for monetary gain.
gambling is just like investing but without making any effort or due deligence to find out either the nature of the money generating activities involved and/or the chances or odds of getting a return on investment.
like giving black peepuh loans. for whatever reasons.
also whether money have or doesnt have a value depends entirely on what you use as money. if you use food item as money then they certainly have their intrinsic value based on the callories they contain.
if you use metal as money then these monies certainly have their value as raw materials for tools and weapons. to claim blanketly that money has no value is to be ignorant of what money is and of its history and its possible future.
money is also a lot of things, as a capacitor of purchasing power, as a conduit for political power, as a leverage intra-nationally and inter-nationally, a reserve of excess influence and potential and many more.
it is also a tool. a power tool.
you dont know money. -
2023-11-28 at 12:59 AM UTChttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWwKePTgECA
This is hilarious to me.
Documentary maker tries to help some hooker who ran into the crips or some shit with crowdfunded money, then is like "there's some black guy hanging around".
Last part brings him on.
He's like "you her pimp" and black guy is all "dis life, once you in it you in it".
Documentarian is like "oh your role models are drug dealers and pimps, so I guess can't blame you or whatever. Lets blame the rich for not sharing their wealth I guess". -
2023-11-28 at 4:20 AM UTC"sex worker"
-
2023-11-28 at 6:39 AM UTC
Originally posted by Donald Trump https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWwKePTgECA
This is hilarious to me.
Documentary maker tries to help some hooker who ran into the crips or some shit with crowdfunded money, then is like "there's some black guy hanging around".
Last part brings him on.
He's like "you her pimp" and black guy is all "dis life, once you in it you in it".
Documentarian is like "oh your role models are drug dealers and pimps, so I guess can't blame you or whatever. Lets blame the rich for not sharing their wealth I guess".
what stupid fucking tattoos
also "I was giving you $300-400 a day" LOLThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2023-11-28 at 6:47 AM UTC
-
2023-11-28 at 6:57 AM UTCok, finished it, it wasn't even funny, just incredibly uncomfortable and pathetic
it's like the interviewer wouldn't even recognise that Dantavius was playing him as well as the woman. it's impossible that he didn't see it; he just played it off like 'someone else fucked you so I guess it's my turn to get fucked lol'.
at least the hooker seems to understand and accept she's being used -
2023-11-28 at 8:50 AM UTC
Originally posted by aldra ok, finished it, it wasn't even funny, just incredibly uncomfortable and pathetic
it's like the interviewer wouldn't even recognise that Dantavius was playing him as well as the woman. it's impossible that he didn't see it; he just played it off like 'someone else fucked you so I guess it's my turn to get fucked lol'.
at least the hooker seems to understand and accept she's being used
the ones who were really being used are the ones clicking that video and monitize it for the uoloader -
2023-11-28 at 9:56 PM UTC
-
2023-12-13 at 5:34 PM UTCThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2023-12-13 at 6:11 PM UTC
-
2023-12-13 at 6:28 PM UTC
Jusstiss!The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2023-12-13 at 6:32 PM UTCmor Jusstiss!
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2023-12-13 at 6:36 PM UTC
-
2023-12-13 at 8:03 PM UTCStop, drop and die.
