Is "Targetted Killing" acceptible?

sovietsean wrote:

Well im sorry that you had to go threw such a hard time, but the fact remains your father choice to start a company that wasn't in demand at the time and it sounds like he wasn't good at keeping his books. But he had the freedom to choice what he wanted to do. Maybe he should have gone back to school and changed to something more in demand and better pay. Like you said he stubbornly insisted it sounds like a failure of your father then the system we have. The same system that created bill gates or steve jobs is the same that your father was in.

His father starting that company was just a means of delaying the inevitable, ie showing a failure of the system that his father merely tried to circumvent. As to your opportunity argument, this is why unemployment figures are presented as lower then they are because people are convinced that there is all this opportunity in the capitalist economy. You see all kinds of people living in poverty but think because they are doing some get rich quick scheme that in the world of opportunity it will pay off. Its not ideology at play here, its pure fragging math, socioeconomic mobility is a joke, and everyone knows it. American politics consists of two far right parties fighting each other over nominal issues and acting as if class struggle does not exist. Looking at the last 20 years, people can either defend the small growth of millionaires we had and claiming the rising unemployment , lower quality of employment, and less socioeconomic mobility as all being worth it, or you can just be honest that its not working. How is anybody free to choose when the odds are so stacked, it sounds more like choosing to win a lottery ticket. You can't possibly have more than a small % of any population being super rich.

His father could have just been a stepping stone. It was his failure to cut his losses and get back up and move on. He could very well taken that money that he used start a handyman company and gone to school. It also sounds like people didn't wanna hire him to low skill jobs when there are 1000 other people doing the same job. It's a failure of people. Yea never trust unemployment numbers here's how I look at them if I have a job its 100% if I don't then its 0%. If i can't fix my own issues I can't fix the world's. If someone falls for a get rich scheme that is their issue not mine, but they will learn a great lesson in life and can pick them selfs right back up. Nothing is holding any of you back from going out today and starting your own company and doing whatever you want. Could it fail sure if its a crappy idea and no one wants to use it sure. But you could learn a lesson about what people want and don't want or hell go to school become dr. no one is stopping you but you. Ha you speak of freedom yet speak of ruling as a dictator. Also him talking about his father's failed company has nothing to do with targeted killing

sovietsean wrote:

Well im sorry that you had to go threw such a hard time, but the fact remains your father choice to start a company that wasn't in demand at the time and it sounds like he wasn't good at keeping his books. But he had the freedom to choice what he wanted to do. Maybe he should have gone back to school and changed to something more in demand and better pay. Like you said he stubbornly insisted it sounds like a failure of your father then the system we have. The same system that created bill gates or steve jobs is the same that your father was in.

Whether a skill is in demand, in a particular location, or not, the fact still remains that it is of valuable necessity. All work is important to society, whether it's rewarded well monetarily or not. Someone has to do those jobs, and they should at least be adequately compensated for it. The goal should not be to have try to pursue get rich quick schemes, but to ensure sufficient livelihood for all people, in all occupations. And when even the petit-bourgeoisie are not valued for there know how, I'd say that yes the system is flawed, and has failed to work for most people. P.S. Yes, this thread has gotten off topic. But that is the fault of "sovietsean" interjecting his right-wing libertarian boilerplate talking points into the discussion, when they're not even directly applicable to the subject matter. And, by the way, why is a libertarian rightist calling himself a soviet anyway?

Well sure all skills are important in one way or another. I father build most of the house i grew up in and he still lives in, but does that mean he ran out and got a job doing that or started a company doing it. hell no cause he was smart enough to know it wasn't for him and it there were better choices he could make. Sure all work is important without people doing all jobs everything would fall apart. I never said your dad was doing a dirty dumb job. I just said it wasn't needed. If you need 100 people to do a job and 200 people go for it what should you do hire 200 so society goes broke and the people get paid less or do you only hire the 100 and allow the others to try else where. Maybe the town over they are hiring 500 and only have 50 apply. Or the 100 could look at another line of work maybe go to school. I never said people shouldn't be paid where wages. But people shouldn't be paid for nothing. What get rich scheme i guess people do that I don't maybe you do. Again all occupations should get fair wages but if there is no work there is no wages like with your father. He should have said hmmm there are already 40 people doing the same thing i wanna do and the town only has 4000 people in it would this really work out, is there that big of a demand for it. Sure the system is flawed but everything is flawed nothing is perfect, but you can't blame the failures of your daddy on the big bad system you can only blame him. Can you really blame your neighbors for not hiring him or someone in dc for him not keeping his books in order. lol im neither right wing or libertarian sorry. Lets see i came in talking about targeted killing and your first post on this thread was about you poor old dads run down company. Let me look the thread was targeted killing not our father's failures in life. Again not right wing or libertarian im a common sense kind of guy.

sovietsean wrote:

Well sure all skills are important in one way or another. I father build most of the house i grew up in and he still lives in, but does that mean he ran out and got a job doing that or started a company doing it. hell no cause he was smart enough to know it wasn't for him and it there were better choices he could make. Sure all work is important without people doing all jobs everything would fall apart. I never said your dad was doing a dirty dumb job. I just said it wasn't needed. If you need 100 people to do a job and 200 people go for it what should you do hire 200 so society goes broke and the people get paid less or do you only hire the 100 and allow the others to try else where. Maybe the town over they are hiring 500 and only have 50 apply. Or the 100 could look at another line of work maybe go to school. I never said people shouldn't be paid where wages. But people shouldn't be paid for nothing. What get rich scheme i guess people do that I don't maybe you do. Again all occupations should get fair wages but if there is no work there is no wages like with your father. He should have said hmmm there are already 40 people doing the same thing i wanna do and the town only has 4000 people in it would this really work out, is there that big of a demand for it. Sure the system is flawed but everything is flawed nothing is perfect, but you can't blame the failures of your daddy on the big bad system you can only blame him. Can you really blame your neighbors for not hiring him or someone in dc for him not keeping his books in order. lol im neither right wing or libertarian sorry. Lets see i came in talking about targeted killing and your first post on this thread was about you poor old dads run down company. Let me look the thread was targeted killing not our father's failures in life. Again not right wing or libertarian im a common sense kind of guy.

I don't think that there were a huge number of firms doing this sort of thing. I remember only one other, actually. But I don't want to play the blame game. The point I was just trying to make was that it takes more than just ambition for an enterprise to be able to functionally succede, and be financially solvent. And if one were to read this thread's posts in reverse order, it can be seen that "sovietsean" caused it to diverge in topic, in his replies about the socio-economic conditions that can lead some people to stage a revolution, in the first place. And I feel that it's obvious what his underlying ideology is too. After all if it quacks like a duck, it's a duck. I likewise feel that my socio-political views are common sense. But I also acknowldege that it's shaped by my experiences, and influences, that have served to shape my personal consciousness. So I'm not too much of an indivisualist to accept an ideological label for my views.

Well I guess your town was smaller and only needed one. Maybe the town could of used another person doing it but you father just didn't get the word our or like you said he sucked at his bookkeeping and was losing money. The point is there are lots of reasons why your dad failed and most of them are your fathers fault. Yet you like to blame it on a system as if wall street came to your house and shut it down. Hell yea it takes a lot more then ambition to run a enterprise. Yep having a discussion about targeted killing with someone else and then you come from left field with an bs story why our system is bad. Your dad had a fair shot and he failed. So you are going to take one subject i talked about and assume I must be like that with all other issues. Thats pretty blind of you. Its not common sense to take an event where your dad ran a company into the group and blame it on others.

Sure. Killing the other enemy is acceptable because he would do the same to you. Killing someone permanently neutralises a person as opposed to imprisoning them.

Yes. Reactionaries must be smashed whenever they put up resistance against the revolutionary working classes. Since it's impractical to be exhaustive and smash all of them, whacking the leaders and the relevant ones is quite practical.

Kill them with kindness!
First put them under house arrest. Then make them do a speech on how they are being cared for and that they are fine, this should confuse them. Then once you have made enough propaganda out of them maybe exil them or chuck 'em in a gulag. Killing them will make them a Matyr and rally thier supporters, leading to lots of anti propaganda.