Wealthy people more likely to cheat, lie and break the law...?

[RD]

Contention between bands of humans can almost always be boiled down to the fight for resources. Resources can be anything in demand, anything at all. Since supply and demand is what drives the fight for resources, and there can even be a demand for vibrations in the air, it is deemed a resource and therefore a price can be attached to it.

It doesn't matter if it's fair or makes sense. That will only count when we become Vulcans.

I was actually thinking about this last night as another argument for the idiocy of our race: War. "Let's solve our problems by violently murdering other people who aren't really the cause of the problems in the first place, since it's the government making the decisions." And the fact that thousands of young men and women are willing to possibly throw their lives away for a war some rich, callous, old white dudes decide is worth fighting.

[raspberry jam]

@Kael that's all very nice, however you confuse the action of theft with the crime of theft. Crimes need to be proven in court, and in a way they don't exist before they are proven (on account of guilt being a fully imaginary concept that is assumed to not exist until it is proven); actions, on the other hand, simply are made and that's that.

Contention between bands of humans can almost always be boiled down to the fight for resources. Resources can be anything in demand, anything at all. Since supply and demand is what drives the fight for resources, and there can even be a demand for vibrations in the air, it is deemed a resource and therefore a price can be attached to it.

It doesn't matter if it's fair or makes sense. That will only count when we become Vulcans.

Yeah, that's what I'm saying,

I was actually thinking about this last night as another argument for the idiocy of our race: War. "Let's solve our problems by violently murdering other people who aren't really the cause of the problems in the first place, since it's the government making the decisions." And the fact that thousands of young men and women are willing to possibly throw their lives away for a war some rich, callous, old white dudes decide is worth fighting.

Yeap. In reality, these young men and women were either murdered by these rich, possibly-white dudes, or their freedom and good nights' sleep were taken from them when they were made to do what they do. Either that, or worse, their very sanity was taken from them and then they'll do these things and still sleep well because they think that what they did was right.

[Kael Valeran]

@Kael that's all very nice, however you confuse the action of theft with the crime of theft. Crimes need to be proven in court, and in a way they don't exist before they are proven (on account of guilt being a fully imaginary concept that is assumed to not exist until it is proven); actions, on the other hand, simply are made and that's that.

Thats false. I meant theft, not crime of theft. Theft does not need to be proven in court. I have given a perfect example, free trade products. It is a form of theft that is not identified in court but people chose to take action. Majority choice is respected. Buying free trade coffee is not theft but when an outside country mass imports products against the will of the majority vote of the country of ownership, like non-free trade coffee, that is theft, as they have disrespected the majority vote of the decision to give the products at such low cost by the country of ownership.

[Rob Van Der Sloot]

And again I say, that is all a load of complete rubbish. If you produce something entirely by yourself, and then sell it, it can by no means of the meaning of the word be considered theft in any way. Everyone knows what theft means. If it is theft, it isn't legal. Legal theft is an oxymoron, unless we are talking the taking of land from other people in a legal way. Creating something from scratch and selling it, is never ever theft. Not legal theft, and not illegal theft.

Besides, now you're derailing the whole subject to a game of scrabble. We were discussing wether rich people are more inclined to ignore the law, or take things at the expense of others. Some folk argue that you don't get rich unless you are a bit of an @sshole, and my point was that there are plenty of ways to become rich and not be an @sshole. Notch I would consider an example. He became rich with one game, he got lucky, and he made a good game as well. I think the study is biased as hell, and I don't think there is any unbiased way to do such a study. Because doing the study in itself shows an assumption that how much money you have on your bank account is directly linked to your morals. I call rubbish on that assumption as well.

[raspberry jam]

Thats false. I meant theft, not crime of theft. Theft does not need to be proven in court. I have given a perfect example, free trade products. It is a form of theft that is not identified in court but people chose to take action. Majority choice is respected. Buying free trade coffee is not theft but when an outside country mass imports products against the will of the majority vote of the country of ownership, like non-free trade coffee, that is theft, as they have disrespected the majority vote of the decision to give the products at such low cost by the country of ownership.

So you mean that if the majority steals something, it's not theft because of majority vote? lol k.

And again I say, that is all a load of complete rubbish. If you produce something entirely by yourself, and then sell it, it can by no means of the meaning of the word be considered theft in any way. Everyone knows what theft means. If it is theft, it isn't legal. Legal theft is an oxymoron, unless we are talking the taking of land from other people in a legal way. Creating something from scratch and selling it, is never ever theft. Not legal theft, and not illegal theft.

Besides, now you're derailing the whole subject to a game of scrabble. We were discussing wether rich people are more inclined to ignore the law, or take things at the expense of others. Some folk argue that you don't get rich unless you are a bit of an @sshole, and my point was that there are plenty of ways to become rich and not be an @sshole. Notch I would consider an example. He became rich with one game, he got lucky, and he made a good game as well. I think the study is biased as hell, and I don't think there is any unbiased way to do such a study. Because doing the study in itself shows an assumption that how much money you have on your bank account is directly linked to your morals. I call rubbish on that assumption as well.

No, it's still the same thing. You just don't realize that being an ******* is so vital to our entire society that we are *******s to each other all the time, and the ones that do it best will accumulate points. I mean money.

Also, no, you never create something from scratch. Never ever. You sit down and write a game, in doing this you draw on:

• Stuff you learned in school (tax payer money, therefore stolen)
• Being able to live in, in your case, the Netherlands, which was legally stolen from I don't know who
• Food that you eat while you do this, grown on land that has been stolen again and again since back in ancient times,
• ...and wash that food down with some Coke that is designed to be tasty to generate a desire in you for that drink (theft, unless you believe in nebulous concepts like "free will")

Then when it's done, you turn around and prevent others from freely copying your game, even if they get their hands on it, just so that you will be able to sell it (theft of their freedom).

All this theft is perfectly legal.

Note, I'm not saying that it's wrong or that it shouldn't be legal.

[Rob Van Der Sloot]

Oh for crying out loud, now you are just discussing semantics, and that is just a big waste of time. Seriously, The Netherlands were never stolen from anyone, and the country I live in, has nothing to do with the things I create.

None of your examples can be considered legal theft. They can be considered not-theft. So really, what are we discussing here?

[raspberry jam]

Oh for crying out loud, now you are just discussing semantics, and that is just a big waste of time. Seriously, The Netherlands were never stolen from anyone, and the country I live in, has nothing to do with the things I create.

None of your examples can be considered legal theft. They can be considered not-theft. So really, what are we discussing here?

The Netherlands were stolen from local tribesmen by the Romans, stolen from Spain by the English and by locals (Dutch people who thought they should own their own country), and so on.

What leads you to say that my examples are not theft? Certainly, the first (taxation) and last (copyright) are outright legal theft.

[Alaris]

If I had enough money to live happily, I would develop and distribute my game for free. The point of asking for money is that devs can continute to develop stuff people want.

[raspberry jam]

If I had enough money to live happily, I would develop and distribute my game for free. The point of asking for money is that devs can continute to develop stuff people want.

I said earlier, it's not wrong.

[Alaris]

It's not theft either.