🚀 go-pugleaf

TenthStone wrote:


> laissez-faire is French for approx "live and let live."  This
> person has no idea.

Who cares about French? It's the CONCEPT that's important, not the literal 
translation. Maybe you should go back to 9th grade English class...
 
> I 'lieve in "laizze-faire".  But you have a very immature knowledge of
> politics, young Jedi.  laissez-faire is the main principle 'hind the
> free market, not capitalism.  'n' do you even know what communism
> is ('sides the "great evil" that Reagen wanted us to 'lieve)?

Close enough. He's got the right idea. I mean, isn't capitalism a FREE MARKET? 
Besides that, if you're so smart, how come you don't even know that these are 
ECONOMICS we're dealing with, not politics? You're just a fool who's obsessed with 
apostrophes, that's all.
 
> Oh, 'n' your def of laissez-faire is so incredibly wrong I ain't even
> gonna comment on it any more than this sentence.  Ya ain't
> got the slightest concept what laissez-faire is, though.

Adam Smith's book says your full of crap(Yes, I have read it)! Who do you think is 
right, the guy who invented the concept, or some jack-ass who just thought he'd 
drop in and pretend he knows something about "laissez-faire"? 


> Umm... there's no way to catch ppl who give copies of software to
> their friends, 'cause the crime ain't big enough to notice.
> Butcha see, pirates ain't merely ppl who give 'way free software...
> they're ppl who take the software from the pirates.

Your point? You can't catch those guys either, so the pirates STILL win by
default. Yes, I realise that this post is rather abstract, but he's still got a
very valid point: As long as pirates like me can steal without a qualm, YOU 
LOST!!! You can't catch me, I don't feel guilty, so YOU LOSE!!! Get the point? 
Pirates DO win by default, and you anti-pirate dorks are just jealous 'cause 
you're wasting your money buying over-priced software.
 
> Actually, nobody wins.  The corps battle it out with the pirates
> indefinitely.  Unless, of course, one manages to find a weakness in the
> other. (yeah, right)

That depends on how you define "winning". I guess you could look at it both ways.