Uh, yes they do.
3 Likes
The Big Four withhold the most advanced technology from capsuleers. If they didn’t, all of our ships would be as powerful as the Gold Magnate in comparison to the cheap nonsense they lets us have now. The only reason we can make basic tech sing is because we’re in pods, but the real ships are being used by navy capsuleers, as they should be.
1 Like
I remember those “security forces” from when I was a DUSTer. I actually got a lot of my best crew from those “company towns” that I liberated in a way befitting of my name, but most of the time the companies would listen to reason and ISK so I didn’t have to slay their “security forces.”
2 Likes
A couple quick notes on the capitalism talk:
(1) Despite being run by corporations, the Caldari State doesn’t follow the usual capitalist corporate model all that closely. A lot of it works a lot like Arrendis’s description of a company town, down to stuff like corporate scrip being a thing, but the Caldari megacorporations are literally the Caldari government. This means that their concerns are not ultimately limited to the benefit of shareholders-- they’re responsible for the health and well-being of the Caldari as a people, and forget this at their peril. (That’s not to say that they’ve never forgotten…)
In the end, it’s a corporate feudal system with some quirks, like not necessarily being bound to a single corporate “lord” all your life.
(2) Probably the most purely capitalistic society in the cluster is the Angel Cartel, a free market where anything and everything can be bought. Put as much creepy emphasis on that last bit as you like; if you can imagine someone selling it, it’s probably available somewhere.
4 Likes
The quote you’re responding too, I’ve already admitted error in what I said.
Because if you don’t restrain capitalism, you get us capsuleers essentially.
Is that a good thing or a bad thing?
You say “no” but your qualifying words say “yes”…
I’m just going to assume “no means no.”
I suppose killing yourself is one way to end participation if you are so inclined.
No, not really my plan or style. Just wondering if there’s some way to beat the system short of death.
1 Like
It is what it is.
My own idealism on such matters died long ago well before I ever became a freelancer; but I have my own ways to cope, and I am sure so do others.
I can only speak for myself, and as such I don’t feel duplicitous because I make it evidently clear that I am a murderer and a rather terrible person by most measures of morality and common decency.
2 Likes
I say governmental regulation is the only thing that forces capitalism to be beneficial.
You say it isn’t only government regulation that does so.
And then ask if I’m agreeing with you? No. I’m not agreeing with you. Capitalism is inherently amoral. It does not give a crap about society. The only way to keep the ‘free market’ from becoming a monopoly-driven oligarchy is to limit its freedom.
The fact that you can fail doesn’t make it a side effect. It simply means you can fail.
It’s not a ‘side benefit’ of capitalism. It’s a direct effect of regulations that force beneficial effects. It’s like saying ‘you know, not suffocating and slowly freezing is a side effect of your ship having an engine’. It’s not. It’s a direct effect of your ship having a hull.
2 Likes
Not quite so sure that I did say that.
You said,
Which seems to read as your saying that government regulation is preventing competition and benifit to society. Which was in response to a statment I admit I mispoke. Though, based on your response here I see I misread your intent
Thinking that you were decrying government regulation I then said.
Which is me rejecting laissez-faire style economics. However, you seem to think that I was espousing laissez-faire style economics…
So yes, Ms Arrendis I do think that we’re almost on the same page here.
The fact that you can fail doesn’t make it a side effect. It simply means you can fail.
Alight, fine.
It’s not a ‘side benefit’ of capitalism. It’s a direct effect of regulations that force beneficial effects.
If you seriously think that I’m arguing against government regulations…I mean I don’t know what to say. I do think that benefit to society is but a side effect, at best, as it’s certainly not the direct intention of capitalism. Also, yes I do think that government regulation is needed to keep capitalism in check and beneficial, I never argued against regulation. You did in another thread scold me for saying regulations on the free market were required. Perhaps that’s why I interpreted you as saying that you were against regulations in this one? I find it odd that you now think that I said that I’m against regulation though, or that any measurable benefit can be achieved without it.
2 Likes
Correct!
If you’re willing to pay, and possibly wait a while for the particularly exotic items, then either myself or one of my colleagues should be able to provide more or less any item you wish.
2 Likes
And probably even if you can’t.
2 Likes
Except I said that in response to:
Which parses down to:
So are you […] agree[ing] with me [t]hat it isn’t only government regulation that [does so]?
You literally asked me if I was agreeing with your position, which was… what you’re not quite so sure you said.
You said it. Promise.
And I’m not sure how you read ‘government regulation is the only thing ensuring competition and societal benefits’ as ‘government regulation prevents competition and societal benefits’.
Also, ‘anochristic’ isn’t a word. I don’t know if you were going for anachronistic or anarchistic (which would be anarchic) but.hey, I was winging the response and didn’t want to be too pedantic.
(Everyone else: Shut up. It happens. There are times when I don’t feel like maxing out the pedantry.)
And yes, I scolded you for saying regulations are required. They’re not. People can do all sorts of stupid and self-destructive things. Doesn’t make it a good idea.
How much for an actual, legitimate, not-a-cheap-knockoff-or-imitation, authentic Empress Catiz I, bound, gagged, and blindfolded? I’m asking for a… well, not a friend… more like a… well… Miz, ok? I’m asking for Miz. Yoiul’s almost here, you know?
2 Likes
Now that would just be bad for business dear Arrendis.
2 Likes
Yeah, but you can’t tell me the off-chance of setting the two biggest groups of slavers at one another’s throats while Miz gets to ‘rescue’ the Empress and have a long and involved chat with her about the fundamental ‘holy carp, slavery’s bad, mmkay?’ wasn’t worth the long shot. 
2 Likes
Well it’s not like we’re on great terms to start with. Unfortunately, while war is very good for business, it’s not so good if you’re the one fighting it.
Quite.
2 Likes
Well, if I did I did I guess. I’ll need to be more careful of my wording in the future. That statement I made doesn’t parse well at all upon reading it nor did it reflect my actual views on the matter.
Also, ‘anochristic’ isn’t a word.
Ouch, I didn’t catch that one.
And yes, I scolded you for saying regulations are required.
So regulate individuals, no. Regulate capitalism, yes? Am I understanding you correctly now, Ms Arrendis?
2 Likes
Actually I think standings are officially neutral. Like, totally, absolutely, standings set to 0.0. We could maybe interpret that as actual indifference, or maybe as, “We’ve got Sansha and Blood Raiders to worry about; you’re the Republic and Federation’s problem.”
… Though for some reason I seem to remember the Khanid Kingdom being more invested? I don’t know what the official standings are, but, I know they interfere in Cartel doings.
Don’t remember how I know, but…
2 Likes
You are correct, at an organisational level The Cartel and The Empire are not enemies.
However, the majority Minmatar component of Cartel members does lead to a certain low-lying mistrust on both sides.
As for the Kingdom, that’s a rather interesting point. Their standings towards us are neutral, while ours to them are rated at -0.25. This is the smallest “standing” increment The Cartel shows, and I am not entirely sure why it exists. The Kingdom’s relatively close position to Fountain perhaps? Maybe they just don’t like His Previous Majesty.
Either way, I’m not high enough up the food chain to have to worry about that.
2 Likes
Hm. I think from the Empire’s side it might be more of a moral/legal/diplomatic issue: the Empire’s actually pretty law-and-order oriented, and doesn’t condone slavery other than the kind it practices itself (which is theoretically a sort of spiritual apprenticeship more than a strictly for-profit business of exercising property rights over humans).
(Yes, that boils down to, “It’s okay when we do it,” but the Amarr see themselves as literally chosen by God for a certain task, so, for stuff seen as necessary or highly useful in pursuing that task, that’s kind of inevitable.)
2 Likes
Regulate both, as needed, to secure the greatest benefit for the greatest number of people while preserving the greatest personal liberty for the greatest number of people and ensuring the protections for minorities against oppression.
Never said it was easy.
2 Likes
Davadas, Ms Arrendis.
2 Likes