Super awesome fun Star Trek Into Darkness thread

Well, you've never seen me.

That's what happens when a troll who's lost his mojo gets desperate to regain his throne.

Flashy was always a supreme asshole - and lately he's just been pathetic. so much so that he was undermining his previous reputation.

Desperate times call for desperate measures, right?

Interesting. A warning.

I'm trying to remember if El Chup did something like this. Certainly CheekyMonkey did far less than this and her account was deleted, all posts she made were plowed under and the earth was salted, and anyone who deigned to mention her name was PermaBanned.

What is laissez faire capitalism?

All the information in the OP proves is that everyone loves parodies.

no, not really.

where else is there such a gap between those who produce vs those who supervise production? Outside of third world shitholes, only in America is there such a sharply defined culture of hereditary nobility and privilege.

Complete BS.

The vast majority of wealthy people in the United States did not inherit their wealth.

I've never used BR info outside of the BR. That's your friend Dayton.

I cryptically revealed someone's name on here once, that I had gotten from FB in response cryptic involving my own personal info. For that I got a ban. I also got a week's ban for posting a picture of Mewa that I thought had already been posted.

So no, not a comparable situations in either case.

Having said all that, if you look at the rules the phrase used is "zero tolerance". Yet several people, including Dayton, has been able to post BR info and have escaped with slaps on the wrist.

But hey, what do you expect here? Consistency?

Prove it.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/moneybu...ividuals-earned-not-inherited-their-wealth-2/

Done.

Failed.

Read your article. It uses the ridiculous bar of 'inheritance alone.' So if your parents were wealthy, sent you posh prep school, and then Harvard, and then a cushy job with daddy's firm, even when they leave you $100m you are 'self made' under this metric b/c your wealth wasn't solely inherited.

Quite frankly I'm surprised it's as high as 6%. Talk about some lazy ass bastards. Also, considering it also lowers the wealth bar to $500k I wonder if the percentage would be higher or lower if you constricted it to just the top couple of %, the mega rich, which is what most people are talking about when they talk about the wealthy.

Megafortunes are rarely amassed within one lifetime. Most build up over generations.

So, parents are not supposed to help their kids get into good schools and then help you start out if they are able to?

Your parents must've hated you a great deal.

Not the point. The point is that your link failed to back up your point.

Perhaps you should check in your father's chicken coup for a better source.

Oh what a worthless dickhead you are.

Typical though not unexpected.

Get a clue

If you don't inherit actual wealth (money, stocks, trust funds, et cetera) then you still have to work to obtain those things.

Getting a Harvard degree will not make you any money if you do not put it to use. And just obtaining a job is no guarantee of keeping it or making it prosperous and productive.

They hated arrogant hippie fucktards.

Hoh!! Ohh, vah-vah!!
Better hope Baby Jesus didn't hear you!!

What he said was even worse.

yeah, especially about the bankers and other types that make a living off of other peoples' labour...

This is something no one seems to understand about basic economics.

SERVICES (including financial services) are value added products in their own right.

It takes money, work, and effort to run a bank or other financial services provider.

Don't like banks and other lenders? Then next time you want to buy a car, save up your money for five years before purchasing one instead of going to the bank and taking out a loan.

Financial services basically (for a fee) dramatically shortens the time frame for productive work to be done. Whether providing a car, building a house, or starting a business.

Again, you avoid the point and go straight to insults. Your link only counted those who solely inherited all their wealth. Do if you 'eared' 500k working for your father and inherited $100m in this study you earned your fortune. It also lowered the threshold for 'the wealthy' to a lower level than most people consider it to be. This greatly increases the sample size diluting the percentages.

So go and find a source that actually backs up your contention or shut up.

Keep in mind you are a notorious liar so people will be checking your work.

Prove it.

And

http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/real-1-percent

Two wrongs don't make a right.

Turn the other cheek.

What comes after that?

Prison sex.

They don't show their work and they use the terms wealth and income interchangeably, even though the meanings are very different. Bottom line, there's no evidence that the article even applies to the point you're trying make.

It isn't time we all began speculating what STAR TREK xIII will be about?