71
Discussions; Public Archive / Re: BT
« Last post by Dale Eastman on August 01, 2023, 10:38:58 AM »Please explain what is causing this between the alleged contrails.
Private Social Media Platform
Private Social Media Platform
News:
Posting has been enabled without registration.
Posts by unregistered users will not be visible until approved.
Registered users have access to functions not available to guests.
How to post without registering
To register
✨
Posts by unregistered users will not be visible until approved.
Registered users have access to functions not available to guests.
How to post without registering
To register
✨
Recent Posts
72
Discussions; Public Archive / Re: BT
« Last post by Dale Eastman on August 01, 2023, 10:37:41 AM »I'm going to do what I always do when I attempt to interact with folks like you. I'm going to ask you specific questions about the claims you have made. And in your case, I am going to ask you questions about the questions you have asked me.
You have asked six questions. I disassembled your compound sentence/question as I often do to get to the facts and truth of the matter.
➽ Can you account for the change in fuel quality?
Irrelevant. You are using this question as a distraction based upon whatever assumption you have in your thoughts.
➽ How about the lift capacity of wings and the weight of these massive loads of liquids?
Again, you are telegraphing your ignorant assumption. Have you ever watched airborne fire fighting drops?
🔍 Most large air tankers carry up to 3,000 gallons of retardant. The 747 is capable of carrying far more retardant than any other. When first introduced it was listed at 20,000 gallons. Then the federal government certified it at 19,200 gallons. More recently it was required to carry no more than 17,500 gallons. The second-largest capacity air tanker is the Russian-made Ilyushin IL-76 at 11,574 gallons. The DC-10 until a couple of years ago was allowed to hold 11,600 but federal officials now restrict it to 9,400.🔍
KC-135: 200,000 pounds fuel carrying capacity.
The KC-46A’s 212,000 pounds fuel carrying capacity.
➽ Can you explain how those who are supposedly doing this without the knowledge of anyone flying the planes,
Why are you assuming the pilots don't know what they are doing? During ww2 the gubment kept a whole fucking city hidden: Oak Ridge, Tennessee: America's Secret Atomic City
➽ Can you explain how those who are supposedly doing this without the knowledge of anyone on the ground,
Thank you for admitting you had no clue as to what you allegedly watched in that 3 minute, 12 second video. I say "allegedly" because I will be asking you specific questions so you can prove to me that you actually watched that video.
➽ Can you explain how those who are supposedly doing this without the knowledge of anyone working air ports,
How do you know these aircraft aren't being flown out of military bases?
➽ Can you explain how those who are magically protected from these mystery chemicals that no one has shown any hint of any evidence of?
The evidence is being collected. You didn't read the cited website https://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/ wherein the evidence is presented.
➽ Also thanks for admitting that you fail to understand that universalizing from an "instance" is a well known fallacy and so logically CANNOT count as proof of this faith.
More of your ignorant assumptions.
Two questions to follow in two posts with two images the questions are about.
You have asked six questions. I disassembled your compound sentence/question as I often do to get to the facts and truth of the matter.
➽ Can you account for the change in fuel quality?
Irrelevant. You are using this question as a distraction based upon whatever assumption you have in your thoughts.
➽ How about the lift capacity of wings and the weight of these massive loads of liquids?
Again, you are telegraphing your ignorant assumption. Have you ever watched airborne fire fighting drops?
🔍 Most large air tankers carry up to 3,000 gallons of retardant. The 747 is capable of carrying far more retardant than any other. When first introduced it was listed at 20,000 gallons. Then the federal government certified it at 19,200 gallons. More recently it was required to carry no more than 17,500 gallons. The second-largest capacity air tanker is the Russian-made Ilyushin IL-76 at 11,574 gallons. The DC-10 until a couple of years ago was allowed to hold 11,600 but federal officials now restrict it to 9,400.🔍
KC-135: 200,000 pounds fuel carrying capacity.
The KC-46A’s 212,000 pounds fuel carrying capacity.
➽ Can you explain how those who are supposedly doing this without the knowledge of anyone flying the planes,
Why are you assuming the pilots don't know what they are doing? During ww2 the gubment kept a whole fucking city hidden: Oak Ridge, Tennessee: America's Secret Atomic City
➽ Can you explain how those who are supposedly doing this without the knowledge of anyone on the ground,
Thank you for admitting you had no clue as to what you allegedly watched in that 3 minute, 12 second video. I say "allegedly" because I will be asking you specific questions so you can prove to me that you actually watched that video.
➽ Can you explain how those who are supposedly doing this without the knowledge of anyone working air ports,
How do you know these aircraft aren't being flown out of military bases?
➽ Can you explain how those who are magically protected from these mystery chemicals that no one has shown any hint of any evidence of?
The evidence is being collected. You didn't read the cited website https://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/ wherein the evidence is presented.
➽ Also thanks for admitting that you fail to understand that universalizing from an "instance" is a well known fallacy and so logically CANNOT count as proof of this faith.
More of your ignorant assumptions.
Two questions to follow in two posts with two images the questions are about.
73
Discussions; Public Archive / BT
« Last post by Dale Eastman on August 01, 2023, 09:19:51 AM »Quote from: 30 July 20:29
I'd be happy to never come across another flerfer, chermtrail doofus, moon landing denier, etc...
It would be different if they had evidence, used reason, and understood falsification criteria..
Quote from: 31 July 08:26
I finally had evidence presented on the chemtrail - contrail controversy that I found to be definitive.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2q-BZxl-Zxk
And I recommend visiting the site.
Also, as a Boomer, I remember a deeper blue sky. It's faded blue now because of what is being sprayed in an attempt to change the Earth's albedo..
Quote from: 31 July 13:13
Can you account for the change in fuel quality?
How about the lift capacity of wings and the weight of these massive loads of liquids?
Can you explain how those who are supposedly doing this without the knowledge of anyone flying the planes, on the ground, working air ports, etc, are magically protected from these mystery chemicals that no one has shown any hint of any evidence of?
Quote from: 31 July 13:14
Oh, and can you justify the universalization from an "instance" as logically valid?
Quote from: 31 July 14:19
Thank you for admitting that the 3 minute, 12 second video was just too long for your short attention span. And that you couldn't be bothered to visit the source, https://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/
Snarky insult comment about your pedigree withheld (self-censored).
Quote from: 31 July 14:47
Wow.. Thanks for admitting offering any answers is too much effort and you could not be bothered with reason and evidence.
Quote from: 31 July 14:48
Also thanks for admitting that you fail to understand that universalizing from an "instance" is a well known fallacy and so logically CANNOT count as proof of this faith.
But thanks too for immediately going to personal attacks instead of offering anything any thinking person would accept as engaging in the topic.
Quote from: 31 July 14:50
Can you also share the "great" youtube "proof" of the sky being CGI, NASA inventing the Ancient Greeks, and the massive ice wall surrounding the flat earth?
Thanks for outing yourself.
74
Misc. / Re: What statute makes me liable for taxes on
« Last post by Dale Eastman on July 27, 2023, 07:40:58 AM »Original Comment: ➽ Now is the perfect time to request relief for IRS back taxes (including penalties and interest).
Dear IRS
Please answer this question:
What statute in the Internal Revenue Code, using clear and unequivocal language as required by the Supreme Court, makes a private Citizen liable for subtitle A - income taxes on his or her domestically earned compensation for labor?
If you fail to specifically answer with 26 USC §x??x, where §x??x is the statute number, then you have admitted that there is no statute imposing liability for an American's domestic compensation for labor that is taxed in 26 USC §§ 1(a), 1(b), 1(c), 1(d), 1(e).
Please note: the Supreme Court of the United States has said:
In the interpretation of statutes levying taxes it is the established rule not to extend their provisions, by implication, beyond the clear import of the language used, or to enlarge their operations so as to embrace matters not specifically pointed out. In case of doubt they are construed most strongly against the government, and in favor of the citizen." GOULD v. GOULD, 245 U.S. 151 (1917).
The Supreme Court of the United States has said:
... [T]he well-settled rule ... the citizen is exempt from taxation unless the same is imposed by clear and unequivocal language, and that where the construction of a tax law is doubtful, the doubt is to be resolved in favor of those upon whom the tax is sought to be laid... SPRECKELS SUGAR REFINING CO. v. MCCLAIN, 192 U.S. 397 (1904)
The Supreme Court of the United States has said:
If it is law, it will be found in our books; if it is not to be found there, it is not law.
Boyd v. United States, 116 U.S. 616, 627 (1886)
Dear IRS
Please answer this question:
What statute in the Internal Revenue Code, using clear and unequivocal language as required by the Supreme Court, makes a private Citizen liable for subtitle A - income taxes on his or her domestically earned compensation for labor?
If you fail to specifically answer with 26 USC §x??x, where §x??x is the statute number, then you have admitted that there is no statute imposing liability for an American's domestic compensation for labor that is taxed in 26 USC §§ 1(a), 1(b), 1(c), 1(d), 1(e).
Please note: the Supreme Court of the United States has said:
In the interpretation of statutes levying taxes it is the established rule not to extend their provisions, by implication, beyond the clear import of the language used, or to enlarge their operations so as to embrace matters not specifically pointed out. In case of doubt they are construed most strongly against the government, and in favor of the citizen." GOULD v. GOULD, 245 U.S. 151 (1917).
The Supreme Court of the United States has said:
... [T]he well-settled rule ... the citizen is exempt from taxation unless the same is imposed by clear and unequivocal language, and that where the construction of a tax law is doubtful, the doubt is to be resolved in favor of those upon whom the tax is sought to be laid... SPRECKELS SUGAR REFINING CO. v. MCCLAIN, 192 U.S. 397 (1904)
The Supreme Court of the United States has said:
If it is law, it will be found in our books; if it is not to be found there, it is not law.
Boyd v. United States, 116 U.S. 616, 627 (1886)
75
Discussions; Public Archive / ED
« Last post by Dale Eastman on July 26, 2023, 08:54:20 AM »Quote
What the fuck are you talking about
Quote
➽ I'm not gonna play with the simps .. I'm not here for friends or likes ..I'm here for the truth .. and if I find out.. it's curtains for them
You wouldn't know truth if it bit you in the ass.
Schooling: What you have become accustomed to
When the Ruling Class makes rules about what others should read, that's clearly an attempt to make others think and believe what the Ruling Class wants inculcated in the minds of the Ruled (Slave) Class. In a word, Brainwashing. You've not been taught how to think. You've been taught what to think. Scratch that. You've been taught what to regurgitate on demand. How could you know that what you've been indoctrinated to believe is bad logic or lies if you've never observed good logic and truth for comparison?
A well known point is that the earliest things learned are the hardest things to unlearn. I'll just gloss over the concept of these next two words: Truancy Laws. Give your children to the Ruling Class for free public schooling, or be punished (harmed) by the Ruling Class a.k.a. the Government or State.
Link to FEE home pagePure Intentions? It is impossible to discuss, or even understand, the failures of our school system without understanding its origins. The motivations were not pure; they were never to educate. That need not be speculation—it is directly from the mouths of the reformers themselves. The objective was to nationalize the youth in a particular mold.
The Article
I leave further research to the reader to gain an understanding of this normalized evil of the Ruling Class.
https://freespoke.com/search/web?q=Prussian+schooling+system
The rest: https://naturallawmatters.net/Accustomed-To-The-Forms.html
Quote
➽ ---Ahhhh, if one seeks the TRUTH, then he must prepare to light a dozen candles. As I see it, we have got to place our faith in Donald Trump. And if not...prepare to participate in another WAR for Independence.
Nothing changes until the (deliberately made) ignorant population of the world wakes the fuck up to their ENSLAVEMENT.
https://synapticsparks.info/
Quote
Dale Eastman look simpleton ..I didn't ask for your opinion .. copy and paste makes you look silly .. regurgitating someone's thinking, makes u dumb ...
Quote
➽ Dale Eastman look simpleton ..I didn't ask for your opinion ..
I didn't ask you for your opinions either. Yet you posted them... So you must be looking for discussion about your opinions.
➽ I'm not here for friends or likes ..
Neither am I.
➽ I'm here for the truth ..
Me too.
➽ copy and paste makes you look silly .. regurgitating someone's thinking, makes u dumb ...
Says the simpleton too stupid to understand that I copy-pasted my own words from one of my two websites.
So is Greta photo-shopped into a space suit a flat earth comment from you?
https://www.synapticsparks.info/dialog/index.php?topic=1650.0
76
Discussions; Public Archive / Re: Capitalism BM 2 start
« Last post by Dale Eastman on June 27, 2023, 08:10:23 AM »Quote from: 26 June 20:21
Dale Eastman you never answered this
OCR
See any issue here? In this current
Corporate system, no private individual
actually owns anything, so who does?
What does "private owners" mean?
Dictionary
Definitions from Oxford Languages - Learn more
Search for a word
capitalism
/kapadlizam/
noun
an economic and political system in which a country's
trade and industry are controlled by private owners for
profit.
"an era of free-market capitalism"
Similar: private enterprise free enterprise v
Quote from: 26 June 20:22
Dale Eastman do you own property?
Quote from: 26 June 20:27
I can't prove a negative. You and many others use that word and my whole point is I don't know what it means. I know what the word government means to different people. But capitalism seems to be even more perplexing in it's ability to catch a wide variety of people in it's mental box. Authoritarian collectivism such as Communism, fascism, and socialism are worse in many ways because they ignore economic consequences, but a rigged game of monopoly called capitalism isn't much better and much more reliant on deception and secrecy than force.
OCR
The conscious and intelligent manipulation of human behaviors, thoughts and opinions is the primary element in society. Those who hold the knowledge and manipulate these unseen mechanisms in society constitute the invisible government and are the true rulers of humanity. We are governed, our minds are formed, and our ideas are suggested by men we never heard of.
Quote from: 27 June 10:17
BM: ➽ Dale Eastman you never answered this
Actually, I did. Your memory is for shit or you didn't bother to review the discussion. [SHRUG]
Since you've brought it up again...
OCR: ➽ See any issue here?
Yes. Four issues actually.
𝟙 Your lack of ability to cogently explain your anti-capitalism position.
𝟚 Your conflation of two separate items...
OCR: ➽ In this current Corporate system
BM: ➽ regardless, does the current crapitalist system
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflation
𝟛 Your refusal / inability to explain what the fuck you mean even when I ask you questions about what you mean by and because of what you post.
𝟜 You keep appearing to post as if you and I are in some argument - disagreement regarding CAPITALISM. I am NOT arguing with you about CAPITALISM because I am STILL trying to get you to explain, exactly, what the details of this CAPITALISM you are against.
OCR: ➽ In this current Corporate system, no private individual actually owns anything,
Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur.
I reject your bullshit claim... I reject your bullshit opinion... I reject your unsubstantiated belief.
OCR: ➽ What does "private owners" mean?
Not the State you fucking Marxist.
BM: ➽ Dale Eastman do you own property?
In spite of YOUR failure to define OWN, Yes I own property.
Now YOU present YOUR definition of OWN... to include all the traits, properties, attributes, characteristics & elements of what it means to OWN something.
BM: ➽ You and many others use that word [CAPITALISM] and my whole point is I don't know what it means.
You claim you don't know what CAPITALISM means yet you keep posting anti-CAPITALISM screed. Your anti-CAPITALISM screed is what caught my attention in the first place. As I wrote elsewhere, I have spent years attempting to understand what folks like you think and believe, as well as the why folks like you think and believe what you opine.
BM: ➽ I know what the word government means to different people.
If you say so... Given your track record of illiteracy... I don't believe you.
BM: ➽ But capitalism seems to be even more perplexing in it's ability to catch a wide variety of people in it's mental box.
Per your implication: "CAPITALISM" = "MENTAL BOX"
BM: ➽ I don't know what it ["CAPITALISM" = "MENTAL BOX"] means.
Yet you continue to spew your opinion about something you don't understand.
BM: ➽ a rigged game of monopoly called capitalism
Yet you continue to spew your opinion about something you don't understand.
Quote from: 27 June 10:24
Dale Eastman good luck!
Quote from: 27 June 10:28
Dale Eastman PS if you register it, you don't own it. You don't own jack shit. You're a confused slave.
Quote from: 27 June 10:28
BM: ➽ You don't own jack shit.
I own the same tools I've owned for the last 45 years, Plus the tools I purchased since then. Just for example. There is all the other property I own. So YOU don't know what the fuck you are opining about.
You are showing me just how illiterate you are.
Quote from: 27 June 11:02
Dale Eastman tools?! You think the ruling class gives a fuck about our tools? No, they own your cars and land and you, and give you permission to pick cotton for them.
Quote from: 27 June 11:03
Dale Eastman yeah, I'm so illiterate because I don't believe the overlords wyrds dupity Der 🤣
Quote from: 27 June 11:55
BM: ➽ Dale Eastman yeah, I'm so illiterate because
You refuse to see that you made a claim that I've proven is a LIE.
BM: ➽ You don't own jack shit.
DE: ➽ I own the same tools I've owned for the last 45 years
In other words, you're too fucking stupid to understand my words, and you're too fucking stupid to cogently articulate what you want myself and others to believe.
I doubt you can even understand what the words cogently and articulate mean.
Every interaction I have had with you on the topic of CAPITALISM has been me attempting to get you to cogently articulate what you want myself and others to believe.
Quote from: 27 June 12:00
Dale Eastman you define and defend it if you like, it's a made up word without meaning, but do your statist fantasy shit somewhere else, I'm not interested in delusion. You own your tools tho 🤣
Quote from: 27 June 13:20
BM: ➽ it's a made up word without meaning,
You're against that word yet you continue to FAIL to cogently and articulate What, specifically, are the traits, properties, attributes, characteristics & elements of this word thing you are against.
Quote from: 27 June 13:22
Dale Eastman I'm against using nonsensical words. That's it.
Quote from: 27 June 13:29
BM: ➽ I'm against using nonsensical words. That's it.
Yet you continue to fail to prove it's a nonsensical word.
What, specifically, are the traits, properties, attributes, characteristics & elements of "CAPITALISM" that make it a nonsensical word?
Please be cogent and articulate.
Quote from: 27 June 13:40
Dale Eastman if you pay income tax, you don't own anything as you yourself are owned. This isn't rocket science but we've been bamboozled since birth.
Quote from: 27 June 15:03
BM: ➽ Dale Eastman if you pay income tax, you don't own anything as you yourself are owned. This isn't rocket science but we've been bamboozled since birth.
BM: ➽ I'm against using nonsensical words.
Nice attempt at distraction. It didn't work. I am still aware that you have failed to state: What, specifically, are the traits, properties, attributes, characteristics & elements of "CAPITALISM" that make it a nonsensical word?
77
Discussions; Public Archive / Re: Capitalism BM 2 start
« Last post by Dale Eastman on June 26, 2023, 08:42:47 AM »Poking the Dumb-fuck illiterate in yet another thread...
Quote from: 26 June 09:40
Words are how humans communicate ideas. To communicate ideas, words MUST have meanings and definitions. This is why I am a pedantic asshole. Known as Voltaire's Admonition, "If you wish to communicate, define your terms."
Some dumb-fuck illiterate: "Capitalism is bad."
Me: "Define capitalism."
Dumb-fuck illiterate: "Capitalism: Bad."
Quote from: 26 June 12:20
Dale Eastman I'm not going in circles with you again. I'll define and defend free markets, voluntary exchange, property rights, and your consent, but I'm not going to define something fraudulent and nonsensical.
OCR:
Capitalism is a bullshit word.
Defend your overlords bullshit if
you like.
Quote from: 26 June 12:58
BM: ➽ Dale Eastman I'm not going in circles with you again. I'll define and defend free markets, voluntary exchange, property rights, and your consent, but I'm not going to define something fraudulent and nonsensical.
Are you now going to deny that you have, on multiple occasions, presented your position that "Capitalism is bad"?
Quote from: 26 June 15:09
Dale Eastman my main contention is it's a bullshit word, which would make it bad. The definitions don't match reality and the plurocrats I abhor swear by it.
Quote from: 26 June 18:40
Are you now going to deny that you have, on multiple occasions, presented your position that "Capitalism is bad"?
Quote from: 26 June 18:43
Dale Eastman no, bullshit including nonsensical words aren't good mkay?
Quote from: 26 June 21:47
BM: ➽ nonsensical words
You claim "CAPITALISM", a word you refuse to define, is a nonsensical word.
What, specifically, are the traits, properties, attributes, characteristics & elements of "CAPITALISM" that make it a nonsensical word?
78
Discussions; Public Archive / Re: RT CPA
« Last post by Dale Eastman on June 26, 2023, 08:32:32 AM »Quote from: 26 June 09:27
You wanna prove I'm a liar? Post the statute that makes a working stiff liable for a tax on their domestic compensation for labor.
79
Discussions; Public Archive / Re: Capitalism BM 2 start
« Last post by Dale Eastman on June 25, 2023, 09:58:19 AM »Quote from: 25 June 10:55
Your posting of THE ETYMOLOGY FALLACY is a laughable faux pas on your part. Repeating what I posted earlier: I can not tell if you are being dishonest with me or you are simply deluding yourself.
I did an OCR translation so I could copy-paste the words in that image.
I am attributing to you the words you pasted as if they are actually YOUR words.
✏ + An etymological fallacy is committed when an argument makes a claim about the present meaning of a word based exclusively on that word's etymology and holds a word's historical meaning to be its sole valid meaning and that its present-day meaning is completely invalid.
CAPITIS DIMINUTIO has absolutely NOTHING to do with CAPITALISM or CAPITAL. There is NO CONNECTION.
✏ the study of etymology is all about gaining clarity of the words meaning which must be all encompassing of both its origins and current use. Only through discernment can one understand if the definition is accurate in reality and truth. Definition are all about gaining CLARITY on meaning and Truth.
Words are how humans communicate ideas. To communicate ideas, words MUST have meanings and definitions. This is why I am a pedantic asshole. Known as Voltaire's Admonition, "If you wish to communicate, define your terms."
Some dumb-fuck illiterate: "Capitalism is bad."
Me: "Define capitalism."
Dumb-fuck illiterate: "Capitalism: Bad."
So far, You have provided me with NOTHING to help me understand your position. Your posts have indicated you wish to persuade others to come to your position, But you have failed to educate me as to exactly what your position is.
BM: ➽ Dale Eastman regardless, does the current crapitalist system RUDE INTERRUPTION: SNIP!
Good. You have admitted that the capitalist system and its other a.k.a., capitalism, is a SYSTEM.
𝟙 What, specifically, are the traits, properties, attributes, characteristics & elements of this system?
𝟚 How, exactly, does this system work?
𝟛 What are the goals of this system?
Quote from: 25 June 11:14
Dale Eastman if I concede the etymology will you answer the simple straightforward question: does capitalism include individual property rights? Yes or No
Quote from: 25 June 11:17
Dale Eastman I have repeatedly stated that I support a free market, property rights and voluntary exchange and that capitalism doesn't seem to include any of that. My position is freedom, yeah but I'm being dishonest here lolz grrrrr
Quote from: 25 June 14:32
BM: ➽ does capitalism include individual property rights? Yes or No
I do NOT know what YOU mean when YOU use the word CAPITALISM. Thus, I can NOT answer your question.
You have admitted that the capitalist system, capitalism, is a SYSTEM.
𝟙 What, specifically, are the traits, properties, attributes, characteristics & elements of this system?
𝟚 How, exactly, does this system work?
𝟛 What are the goals of this system?
Quote from: 25 June 14:34
Nevermind
80
Discussions; Public Archive / Re: Capitalism BM 2 start
« Last post by Dale Eastman on June 24, 2023, 07:22:35 AM »Quote from: 24 June 07:55
CAPITALISM can not exist without CAPITAL. Please present your definition of CAPITAL.
Quote from: 24 June 10:29
I was on a 24 hour ban. Capital = chattel and property. I'm surprised you didn't know the association of Roman Law and the modern legal hodge podge besides the obvious etymological relation.
Quote from: 24 June 19:35
BM: ➽ I was on a 24 hour ban.
I have several reasons why I call Zuckerturd's platform Fecalbook. This censorship crap is one of them. Sorry for not being patient.
BM: ➽ Capital = chattel and property.
How does one invest, per your definition, chattel and property, and for what purpose?
BM: ➽ I'm surprised you didn't know the association of Roman Law and the modern legal hodge podge besides the obvious etymological relation.
Stop attempting to blow smoke up my ass. Assuming as to what the fuck you are addressing, I REPEAT:
That text defines: Capitis diminutio maxima; Capitis diminutio media; and; Capitis diminutio minima.
It has NOTHING to do with CAPITALISM. And your bullshit about etymology.... Well it's bullshit.
capitalism (n.)
1854, "condition of having capital;" from capital (n.1) + -ism. The meaning "political/economic system which encourages capitalists" is recorded from 1872 and originally was used disparagingly by socialists. The meaning "concentration of capital in the hands of a few; the power or influence of large capital" is from 1877.
"Capital" may be most briefly described as wealth producing more wealth; and "capitalism" as the system directing that process. This latter term came into general use during the second half of the 19th century as a word chiefly signifying the world-wide modern system of organizing production and trade by private enterprise free to seek profit and fortune by employing for wages the mass of human labour. There is no satisfactory definition of the term, though nothing is more evident than the thing. [J.L. Garvin, "Capitalism" in Encyclopaedia Britannica, 1929]
https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=CAPITALISM
Free Clue:https://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/capital.asp
Quote from: BM 24 June 20:31
OCR:
THE ETYMOLOGY FALLACY
+ An etymological fallacy is committed when an argument makes a claim about the present meaning of a word based exclusively on that word's etymology and holds a word's historical meaning to be its sole valid meaning and that its present-day meaning is completely invalid. This can be true in some cases, but should never be held as an absolute.
+ The etymological fallacy can also be a fallacy itself when it is used to dismiss the word origins as irrelevant to the current use of the word and its true meaning. This is due to the fact that the study of etymology is all about gaining clarity of the words meaning which must be all encompassing of both its origins and current use. Only through discernment can one understand if the definition is accurate in reality and truth. Definition are all about gaining CLARITY on meaning and Truth. We can change definitions for the purpose of being more accurate to reality but also we can do the opposite and change them to be less accurate to reality which is very dangerous. It is important to understand that the control of language through methods like obfuscation has had a devastating effect on the human ability to think and communicate with clear understanding. The control of how we communicate is a powerful weapon to obscure Truth and create individuals that have no bearing on the ideas that they wish to express and the ideas which they are programed to believe. Weaponizing Miscommunication through the control of definitions leads to epistemological breakdown and only serves to further the Dark Occult agenda to divide us from Truth, Reality and each other.
+ This is also connected to the fallacy fallacy which states that since somebody uses a fallacy that their entire argument completely invalidated.
Quote from: 24 June 20:31
Dale Eastman regardless, does the current crapitalist system provide property ownership, voluntary trade, or property rights?