PsihoKekec
Swashbuckling Accountant
We aren't part of the classical economy anymore, we are now a glorious debt based post-industrial economy.
We aren't part of the classical economy anymore, we are now a glorious debt based post-industrial economy.
We aren't part of the classical economy anymore, we are now a glorious debt based post-industrial economy.
I don't find it unethical. Basically, a bank and the government made up economic bullshit. They are the ones who did wrong to the taxpayer. Soros was just the well compensated whistleblower.I suppose someone would have to be a fan; but you do realize that means the taxpayers were the ones ultimately left to foot the bill, don't you? That's not exactly something an ethical businessman would do.
A whistleblower is someone who informs the people of wrongdoing on the part of certain organizations; Soros did nothing of the sort. At best, he took advantage of the situation to benefit himself; which is not praiseworthy. At worst? He's a parasite, because the man earned his money at the expense of everyone else; and if that's someone you want to look up to? That's fine; but doing so says a lot about you, and none of it is good.I don't find it unethical. Basically, a bank and the government made up economic bullshit. They are the ones who did wrong to the taxpayer. Soros was just the well compensated whistleblower.
No; it's pointing out that a thief who steals from another thief, is still a thief. Stop ascribing noble intentions to someone who demonstrably never had them; you sound like you're trying to convince yourself, more than anyone else.He did expose wrongdoing, on the financial side: The Bank of England bullshitted the public saying they could stay in the ERM. Soros exposed their bullshit. The people you should be mad at are in the Bank of England and the Government. The Brits had no business tying their exchange rate to the Germans, as their inflation was 3 times higher. But they did it. Complaining about Soros profiting off of it is like blaming the cop for catching the thief.
I'm not ascribing noble intentions here, just noting that I am happy that someone exposed the bullshit the Bank of England was trying to do.No; it's pointing out that a thief who steals from another thief, is still a thief. Stop ascribing noble intentions to someone who demonstrably never had them; you sound like you're trying to convince yourself, more than anyone else.
I'm gonna call it a communist plot to destroy family & property values.The nuclear family where you move away UK a single dwelling with your spouse and children is a modern creation and entirely untraditional
Exactly so. The Modern Economy is now a game of charades and nothing more--it serves to enrich those able to play the game with the wealth created by a steadily dwindling group of real producers, the farmers and industrialists who actually make things.
I'm gonna call it a communist plot to destroy family & property values.
Family values? Nah son, you're actually a communist infiltrator, you can't trick me fucker
Anyways, by cartoon logic, if he is secretly a commie rat, that would make you a capitalist pig in disguise, attempting to subvert the revolution
No need to subvert the revolution, Communist powers have made compromises with Corporate, it’s in part why China’s so powerful
Helps also get rid of both unwanted competition and companies that may have pissed off the Party
That actually shows to me the value of pragmatism and compromise, that by bringing in elements of (a) different system(s) they have strengthened their country.
Strengthened their government much more in the long run, the people themselves maybe screwed over in the long run, because they(government)didn't think that far ahead, are willing to get rid of actual dissenters with advice and have become rather control-freak-y
Well, that proves my point even further, since they aren't being pragmatic and compromising. Rather than finding a way to integrate dissidents into the regime when possible, they are giving them more grievance.
You know, “open societies” by their nature are no societies.
A society must be closed off in some form or another from outside forces, influences or agendas.
Soros world is basically New York City-a place where everything is permitted and no one is excluded, thus the city has no cultural character or identity beyond the identity of being cosmopolitan.
From a philosophical POV-soros wants identity to be negated entirely in the pursuit of the value of “tolerance”.
Which is probably one of the most pernicious and insidious notions ever.
I honestly think he imagines Muslims just need to be warmly welcomed and they will integrate into his post modern popperian liberal utopia.How much does Soros hang around say, Muslims? Because I think amongst immigration groups, they’re the most homogenic in terms of social values or majority held beliefs