What did he mean by this?

>>85160016
He's looking rough in his old age.

>>85160016
Jesus Christ, sifting through all that trash must be a health hazard.

He'd make for a wonderful live action Hugo Strange.

>>85160046
it's mostly because he lost all that weight and has a lot of excess skin now

>>85160016
Man he aged like 20 years when he lost weight

>>85160046
The result of Godlessness.

>>85160016
He's implying Marvel is trash.

I use to respect Pen until I learned he's friends with Trump.

>>85160046
>>85160058
>>85160172
The reason he looks like shit is because he lost 100 lbs by eating potatoes and nothing else. Sure, he's skinny now, but that is not a healthy diet.

>>85160424

he said he preferred bernie sanders to trump

coming from a libertarian thats kinda out there

>>85160424
Well that just makes me like him more.

File: I can Smell You.jpg (9KB, 216x95px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 216x95px

>>85160016

>>85160016
Old Penn looks like a fat Vincent Price now.

Dr.Strange got hijacked! "Class of Titans" stole his look and voice for their villian.

>>85160058
>>85160221
>>85161009

Its the weight loss combined with the bad facial hair,
protip folks: If you can't grow a proper mustache or beard, don't even try to half ass it, it just looks godawful. It's all or nothing

>>85160172
You think he would have the cash to throw around for a few niptucks.

>>85160058
He's in his 60s if not older. For his age that's not bad.

>>85160016
Is that Rip Torn?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QG_tkxZZMkk

>>85160016
>check resume
>face looks like a chewed steak
>into the trash it goes

Here's a quick pre-cooked meme in case the movie turns out to be a shitshow come November.

File: 1470351047616.png (191KB, 231x505px) Image search: [Google]

191KB, 231x505px

>>85162136

Whoops.

>>85160981
NO
Delete this

>>85160424

I remember reading in an interview where he said he'd even pick Hillary over Trump. Just cause they're friends doesn't mean he'd vote for him. Even the Clintons are (were?) friends with Trump.

>>85160424
He's friends with Trump and thinks he's a character but he also thinks he has no business being president. To paraphrase, he said his personality is entertaining and a great fit for reality TV but not presidential material.

Now, I hate Hillary and I won't be voting for her. But if one of Trump's friends actually believes this and is willing to make it known publicly then I'm inclined to believe him. And all the evidence supports his claim. Trump has no idea what he's talking about. So I won't be voting for Trump either.

>>85160016
So is Penn writing Doctor Strange or having a cameo in the movie?

>>85162336
>>85160424
Thanks for letting me know I don't have to care about your opinions, troglodytes

>>85162424
Trump does know what he's talking about, the fact you don't realize this reflects on you.

File: Katalin.webm (2MB, 720x404px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 720x404px

>>85160016
>Penn and Teller will never train the lead of a Zatanna movie in stage magic.

>>85162603
Trump knows what he's doing, yes.

But what he's doing isn't what's in the best interests of the USA or the world at large. It's in his interests. He's a cipher for the dissatisfied sections of the right; he offers them a voice, they offer him votes. He's a narcissist, the currency he trades on is attention.

>>85162687

That's the worst trick I've ever seen

>>85162603
Kek, he's literally a meme spouter. His convention speech was nothing but a string of buzzwords and empty promises. He has never brought anything worth discussing to the table and embarasses himself at every turn because he doesn't have a lick of sense OR because this is just a game to him. You just bought into the sad alt-right memes. Same as the shills who are voting Hillary because "CURRENT YEAR."

They are both completely unfit to be president.

>>85162603

Jesus Christ, all I did was say I read an interview with trashman. Trumpfags really are thin-skinned.

>>85162767
I feel like she was standing there, expecting some huge applause break, and none came.

>>85162767
>>85163618

Took me a sec but i think i got it, impressed me the first time though, which is all you usually see.

>>85162852
Hillary is corrupt as fuck, but it's a bit silly to pretend she's on the same level as Trump when talking about unfitness for presidency.

>>85162152
He has a very long face, doesn't he?

>>85162746
So the lowering taxes on all brackets, revamping the veteran's affairs programs, committing to fixing the country's infrastructure, and unfucking America's trade deals are all out of pure narcissism? All of that work for people he'll never meet he's doing out of spite for people he doesn't like?

>>85163912
Gonna be real here. I did not know who that was until someone here said his name, and loved the show Bullshit.

>>85160424
Really? The fact that he's friends with Trump and not the fact that he's a walking libertarian caricature?

>>85163935
Does he even know how to achieve those? If they are possible?

>>85162156
Hello?

>>85163935
Not out of spite, he's doing it for attention.

The 'lowering taxes' thing is an example; it's a policy that always proves to be popular because by and large, people don't like taxes.

>committing to fixing the country's infrastructure
Elaborate; what are the specifics of his plan to fix the infrastructure? As a blanket statement, that doesn't actually mean much at all. It's like saying 'I am committed to stopping racism'. It's a nice sentiment, but it's a broad sentiment tackling a very challenging problem that you need a tight plan to have any hope of beginning to fix.

File: 1470260048006.jpg (188KB, 1000x806px) Image search: [Google]

188KB, 1000x806px

>>85160016
>one of the biggest meme comedians in chan history with the biggest meme company in Hollywood
Pottery.

>>85163935
>lowering taxes on all brackets

oh man, I guess you dont want to have a well funded army to protect you, or those public roads to be repaired, or any of your utilities to stay price controlled thanks to taxes


>revamping the veteran's affairs programs


as he actually laid out any plans to do this? Or just vaguely promise it?


>committing to fixing the country's infrastructure

same as above
>unfucking America's trade deals


do you even know whats fucked ABOUT these trade deals?
This man has said public that he wants to commit war crimes:
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2015/12/15/3732671/trump-isis-kill-family-members/

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-reiterates-desire-to-murder-terrorists-families-a6912496.html
He flat out wants to torture people, and thinks even if its a mistake, they probably deserve it anyway:


http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/trump-responds-istanbul-waterboarding-torture
He wants to use nuclear weapons again:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-elections/donald-trump-refuses-to-rule-out-using-nuclear-weapons-in-attack-on-europe-a6961101.html


and declare world war:

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/donald-trump-bill-o-reilly-declare-world-war-scenario-article-1.2712682


Mother fucker is endorsed by the dictator of North Korea:


http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/05/north-korea-praises-wise-politician-donald-trump
he is a goddamn sociopath. I'm not fan of Hilary, but at least she isn't crazy.


>inb4 muh liberal boogieman

>>85164087
Anyone serious about revamping America's infrastructure would have to massively reform our public works departments and raise taxes to unprecedented levels.

I have engineer friends that constantly say our electrical grids alone are held up by duct tape and prayers.

>>85164080
hi

>>85164213
>he is a goddamn sociopath.
Psychopath. Killary is the one who is the sociopath.

>>85164301

Lets all just agree they're both Narcissitic Sociopaths, the only real difference anyways is that psychopaths kill people because they're psychotic.

oh and trump is orange and has a ferret living on his head.

File: image.jpg (110KB, 1024x1113px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 1024x1113px

I like him cause I'm starting to take up an interest in magic. Watching fool us is quite entertaining, desu

>>85164213
>doesn't rule out the possible use of nuclear weapons
>he wants all out nuclear war!

>our enemies rape, murder, torture, behead, and otherwise commit heinous war crimes

But we can't torture them back if they have information they won't hand over? I'm totally fine with torturing terrorists. And for God's sake did you even read the articles you posted? In the world war one, he's saying that terrorists have a global reach, and that the war on terror is global. Hillary Clinton once kissed David Duke and called blacks super predators but nobody calls her a racist, who gives a shit about North Korea? Can liberals read anything other than a headline?

>what I expected in this thread
Doctor Strange

>what I got
/pol/
You people get triggered so fucking easily

>>85164560
>But we can't torture them back if they have information they won't hand over?

If they have information they won't hand over, how do you know they have the information in the first place? Torture gives bad intelligence. And even aside from that, the fact that he's enthusiastic as to how much he supports torture is a red flag. It's a deeply immoral action; when a presidential candidate talks with glee about how happy they'd be to see it done, it doesn't bode well for how they'd treat other civil liberties.

America has to be better than that or it's nothing at all.

>>85164297
Hello.

>there is going to be stage magic and inception magic in Doctor Strange
>but no actual magic
at least Suicide Squad has that

>>85164702
What is there to discuss about Dr Strange related to OP's pic? There's nothing. This thread was doomed from the start.

>>85164834
>but no actual magic

I thought Doctor Strange shot magic out of his hands or some shit.

>>85163862
You're right. She's FAR more unqualified.

File: 1419835676929.jpg (36KB, 223x349px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 223x349px

>>85164815

/co/ - Comics & Cartoons

>>85164866
He shoots quantum mechanics out of his hand.

File: f35a_half_life2_gravity_gun_on.jpg (39KB, 600x408px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 600x408px

>>85164955
Hello!

File: delet_this.png (257KB, 627x430px) Image search: [Google]

257KB, 627x430px

>>85165102

>>85165176
Hello.

>>85163027
Actually you said that "Trump has no idea what he's talking about." Don't start backtracking just because someone chose to argue.

When you talk shit, expect shit.

>>85165293

>Actually you said that "Trump has no idea what he's talking about."

What the fuck? Are you illiterate or something? Nowhere in my post did I say that. All I said was that I read an interview where trashman said he wasn't gonna vote for trump.

>>85165293
Actually, sorry if you're>>85162336

I thought you might've been>>85162424

>>85164834
When does it count as "actual magic"?

>>85160016
I feel bad for Pen, gettin old.

He is one of the reasons I grew up the way I am in a 90s post USSRia shithole.

>>85165397
When they stop trying to explain it away with pseudo science.

>>85165447
But then Loki's illusions in Thor are actual magic.

>>85164834
I really hope they don't do this with Strange. It's already kinda weird that they did this with Thor. I hope the DCEU isn't afraid to keep magic a real thing with WW.

>>85162852
>using alt-right as an actual term

And you complain about memes

>>85162746
>bringing back factory jobs to a lower class which has experienced wage depression and job losses for several decades and suffered the most during the Great Recession and have still not recovered is not in the best interests of the US

How's suburbia?

>>85165478
They were flickering holograms.

>>85165478
He calls it magic, but they established early on that there's nothing magical about Thor, Asguard, or anything like that. They're just technically aliens from another realm that can do this shit.

>>85165512
There hasn't been a single piece of dialogue about pseudo science in the trailers or the preview comic. When will people stop winging about this?

>>85163027
People who obviously don't know anything but pretend they're superior because they choose to not get involved are annoying

>>85165565
>There hasn't been a single piece of dialogue about pseudo science in the trailers or the preview comic.
Just from the people in charge of the movie.

>>85165565
When the movie comes out.

>>85165560
You people do realize magic and technology are the same thing, yes?
Like, literally.

>>85165598
Got a link handy?

>>85165560
>have magical powers
>but there are biological reasons why you have them
>therefore not magic

>>85165425
I think the USSR's state atheism policy is probably the reason you grew up an atheist, not Penn

>>85165608
You realize the dude that made the fucking movie has already said they aren't magic, yes?

>>85165598
>Just from the people in charge of the movie.
You really let Feige get up your ass about that huh.

>>85165639
In 2014 Feige said that magic can warp the laws of quantum physics and shit, people never let it go. That shit probably didn't even make it in.

>>85165608
No, they're literally not. Magic is supernatural and defies explanation. It cannot be explained. Technology is applied scientific knowledge.

>>85165592

How am I pretending to be superior?

>>85165637
Google doctor strange quantum physics on google, first link that pops up.

>>85165701
>>85165690
Pull the fucking Constantine shaped stick up your ass out.

>

Are you watching the Cosmos series? That’s magic, [the quantum physics]. It’s unbelievable. If somebody knew how to tap into that stuff, what’s the difference between that and magic?

You don’t get into it in Harry Potter, but if a scientist went to Hogwarts he’d find out how some of that stuff is happening! We’re not going to spend a lot of time on that, but there will be some of that. And particularly for a character like Strange, who goes from a man of science to a man of faith and who traverses both worlds. And sometimes there won’t be an answer! Sometimes he’ll want an answer - “How is this happening?!” - and nothing.
>>85165701
>>85165718
>Sometimes he’ll want an answer - “How is this happening?!” - and nothing.

>>85165547
>>85165560
Did they explain in the movie that they were holograms? Because if not then they're actually magic by that very definition.

>>85165701
>Technology is applied scientific knowledge
Wrong, it's just applied knowledge.

File: young nick fury.jpg (22KB, 400x331px)

22KB, 400x331px

>>85165639
>Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
The criticism of "oh mer gerd it's not really magic" is a meaningless argument, as super advanced tech you can't explain it, as magic you still can't explain it. Not like you can walk out of the theater and start making Asgardian tech, fuck you can't even make a real Iron-Man suit.

>>85165746
They look like holograms, they flicker like modern day holograms, and the dude that made the movie and the people in charge of this universe have already said "no, they are not magic, there is nothing magical about them at all, everything is done with alien tech." That trumps any fanfic idea that you wanted to be true.

>>85165744
>what's the difference between that and magic
The actual definitions I gave you.
The mechanics of quantum physics can be observed, studied, and applied.

>>85165447
>Not everything makes sense. Not everything has to.

That's the opposite of trying to explain it away with pseudo-science.

>>85165814
>"no, they are not magic, there is nothing magical about them at all, everything is done with alien tech."
Which guy and when?

>>85165547
Was Loki's illusion flickering when he stabbed Coulson? When he tricked Thor all those times? When he faked cutting of Thor's hand? When he pretended to die?

>>85165781
Name one technology that isn't scientific in nature.
Science is a process through observation and experimentation. Man learned to make and use fire by fucking around with stuff and observing the environment. Birds, apes, and all animals learn how to use tools through observation and experimentation.

>>85160016
Is Ditko getting a dime from this movie?

>>85165825
It's a quote. And you're just ignoring the latter half of that.

Strange is going to look for explanations and not find all of them. It can be no clearer than the harry potter example.

>>85165847
Director of Thor 2 in the dvd commentary.

>>85165884
>Name one technology that isn't scientific in nature.
A meaningless argument. If magic were real it would be one by the definition of technology. Applied knowledge of the arcane arts to acheive wondrous or terrible results. In fact, people were using and inventing many technologies before the scientific method was invented in the first place.

>>85165911
The reason they'll never get an answer is because it is magic and cannot be explained. The moment something is explained in scientific terms, it ceases to be magic by definition.

Harry Potter is a shit example because literally none of that magic is explained in a scientific way. Everything is supernatural and is established as supernatural. That's why there aren't scientists examining how levitation and shit works in those books.

>>85165701
>>85165690
Clark's Third Law.
>any technology that is sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from magic

There is no such thing as supernatural. All that exists is natural, it's only beyond comprehension, but still it exists and resides within natural laws. Even in a fictional universe, everything that exists is by definition natural, because it's there, interacting with other natural stuff.
Magic is the idea that in those universes people can control certain elements to make inter-dimensional shit happen. They are still happening because of cause and effect, they are tools, they are technology.

>>85165920
So you mean the guy who
1. Isn't in charge of the MCU
2. Didn't have oversight over the movie that introduced Thor's World to the MCU
and
3. Didn't even write the script or story for that very movie.

>>85165814
>no, they are not magic, there is nothing magical about them at all, everything is done with alien tech

I think that this is the issue. Not that magic and technology are one and the same, but that the portrayal of magic is as simply an extension of technology in our mode of thinking.

Magic in Doctor Strange be an entirely new field of thinking; though it is studied much as any scientific field, it must be understood on it's own terms, much as biology is not the same as mechanical engineering.

This is the mistake they made in Thor 2. The scene where Jane is on the magic bed in Asgard is an example; she calls it by a scientific name, robbing Asgard of much of it's mystique.

Basically, though there is no difference between magic and technology from a technical standpoint, in fiction there is the matter of presentation. If you present the magic as inexplicable by the standards of modern science, it will carry with it mystique and seem genuinely magical. If you attempt to explain it in modern (pseudo)scientific lexis, you'll really undermine the effect you're going for.

>>85166098
>Basically, though there is no difference between magic and technology from a technical standpoint, in fiction there is the matter of presentation.
This.

>>85166088
What he says still has more bearing than anything you or /co/ has to say about it. Shit is alien tech. It's the MCU, not 616.

>ITT: people that have never read a Strange or Thor comic in their life

There is a system to the magic in Marvel, it's not "lol believe and you can do anything that doesn't make sense." It doesn't matter what Feige says about quantum mechanics or whatever as long as Strange is harnessing his powers by non-technological means through extra dimensional entities that are beyond normal human comprehension. And he is.

You're a bunch of casuals that are butthurt over a technicality that is literally a non-issue. Read some comics or quit complaining.

>>85165997
>it would be one by the definition of technology
No it wouldn't. I gave you the definition of technology. Perhaps in some bizarre what-if scenario magic became real, then the definition could be changed, but then I assure you the word would be preceded by a qualifier such as "arcane" or "scientific" knowledge. I mean, you can't just use existing definitions like that to fit your argument because then you're changing the nature of what you're talking about. Because, again, magic is the power of influence from supernatural forces. It is beyond the realm of science by definition.

>people were using and inventing many technologies before the scientific process
That doesn't mean they weren't doing exactly what it entails. The name and definition was created to explain exactly how the process worked. The process for learning how to create a sword was the same for learning how to create a sewing machine. It just likely took way more trials and a larger knowledge base from which to draw from.
>Observation
>Question
>Hypothesize
>Predict
>Gather Data
>Develop Theory
Rinse repeat.

I hate that they made Thor an alien in the movies while he's just a straight up god with unexplainable magic in the comics

>>85166132
>Shit is alien tech.
Hogun straight up calls Loki a "master of magic". It may be "technology" in the sense of applied knowledge to get a result, but it isn't a machine. It's an ability that Frigga taught him.

File: eHmyN.jpg (406KB, 1600x1228px) Image search: [Google]

406KB, 1600x1228px

>>85166190
>>85166276
>>85166132

>>85166058
Clarke's (great author by the way) Third Law was just talking about the nature of how human beings perceive the world. To a human in real life, yes, advanced technology can appear to be magic.

But we're talking about comic books and fictional worlds that have had histories of actual, literal magic existing in them. There the distinction is important. The idea of magic as a supernatural force is not an invention of humankind, but an established fact.

>>85166399
And then Marvel retconned that right after warren Ellis left.

>>85166276
What is the difference in those definitions of god? Did he create the earth and the heavens? Does he know when you're sleeping, does he know when you're awake? Does he know if you've been bad or good?
Or is he just unimaginably strong to most anyone on Earth.

>>85166328
>Hogun straight up calls Loki a "master of magic"
They also called the science bed magic while a modern day scientist was able to explain how it works. Asgardians in this universe would call a plastic bics lighter a "magic flame" because its easier.

>>85166276
This is factually incorrect.

>>85166260
>I gave you the definition of technology
You thought you did, but you gave an incorrect one. And as for the scientific method you posted, it's a relatively recent list. They might have bone 3-4 of those things, but not in that order, and not with the intention of finding out universal truths. They were doing it to get straight to the applied knowledge "kill the antelope" result.

>>85166499
How? Because its not what you wanted?

>>85165797
>Citation?
https://fusiondotnet.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/amr410142010eng.pdf
Page 17 Violence Against Migrant Women:
"It is a widely held view – shared by local and international NGOs and health professionals working with migrant women – that as many as six in 10 migrant women and girls are raped. A study in 2006 interviewed 90 migrant women held in Iztapalapa Migrants’ Detention Centre, of whom just over half were from Central America. Twenty-three women reported experiencing some kind of violence, including sexualviolence. Of these, 13 stated the person responsible was a state official. Researchers carrying out the study believed the figures may significantly understate the problem because of the reluctance of women to discuss sexual violence, particularly when they are in detention."
>Who is doing the raping?
Smugglers and Mexican officials.
Also saged because it's not related to the thread. Sorry about that.

>>85166530
Fuck, forgot to sage. Sorry.

File: 10-reasons-cyclops-should-be-a-lead-in-the-x-men-movie-franchise-376144.jpg (180KB, 1023x724px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 1023x724px

God damn he aged badly.

>>85166526
What I wanted? I don't know what you're talking about but you've clearly never read Kirby Thor. Or any Thor for that matter.

>>85166611
Neither have you it seems. His mother is Gaia in the comics. An elder God. Not a fucking alien.

>>85166530
That's fair, thanks for the citation. It doesn't really back up Trump's claims because most of the raping seems to be happening in transit, not in the USA, but I'm honestly just happy that someone actually backed up their claims.

sorry for dragging the argument out, saging too, let's get back to sperging about magic now

>>85166420
Define supernatural in a logical way that separates it from anything natural.

>>85166643
What's the difference between a God and an alien save scale?

>>85166487
Then how does that apply to Loki's ability? Yes, it very well could be "technology", but it's not a machine. If it was, they would have taken it from him when he was imprisoned.

File: 800px-asgard.jpg (113KB, 800x323px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 800x323px

>this is a city without technology or science

>>85166668
If something that is "supernatural" that means it is attributed to some force beyond scientific understanding or the laws of nature.

>>85166643
Gods are part of the Cosmic pantheon which has an order and hierarchy. There is no separation of Cosmic and Magic in Marvel. They're the same damn thing.

>>85166643
In Marvel 616 universe the Celestials are Aliens. Galactus is an alien. The Elders of the Universe are aliens. The One Above All is an alien.
I really don't get your point.

>>85166745
But that is literally impossible, because if it exists then it is supported by nature.

>let me just wave my hand and all my problems disappear, literally nothing can harm me
>wtf thats lame
>iono man magic aint gotta explain shit

>>85166745
But if something goes against our current understanding of the laws of nature, then surely it is our understanding, and not the laws of nature, that must change?

The laws of nature contain all that are.

>>85166484
>>85166688
The problem inherent with this argument is that you're applying outside knowledge of the the comics to the word "god." The fact is, there are several ideas of what a god is. In the west, we tend to have this idea of a dude in a sky throne, in the east you get ideas of a god being the world itself, etc. So making a distinction is incredibly difficult, because a powerful alien could fit the ideas of certain gods.

So if the comic or work of fiction refers to them as gods and not in a metaphorical sense, then ideally, you should think of them as gods.

>>85166800
>let me just wave my hand and all my problems disappear
thats obviously not how magic works and now you're being purposefully obtuse

>>85166745
You mean laws of nature as descriptive or prescriptive?
And scientific understanding is essentially a meaningless definition, science is about understanding things, even if we don't know it now we may know it later. You throw an iPhone back 20 years you'd be burnt at the stake for being a witch.

>>85166856
So again, what is the distinction between a super alien and a god? And does it matter?

>>85166792
No, because that's literally what magic is.

Magic doesn't exist. It never will exist. We have a word with it, because humanity has thought up the idea of magic. Magic exists in fiction. It can only exist in fiction where it is able to bend the reality of nature, break rules, and defy logical explanation. There, the distinction can matter. It can matter a little, or it can matter a great deal. You're applying comic book logic to real world logic.

All fictional versions of magic have some kind of rules. Usually those rules exist independently of the current understanding of science, but it still has rules. I haven't seen anyone come up with a coherent argument why the scientific method could not be used to better understand magic if it existed, and why application of magic would not be considered "technology".

>>85166889
>And scientific understanding is essentially a meaningless definition, science is about understanding things, even if we don't know it now we may know it later.

I think that's the crux of portraying magic in fiction. It's not about portraying it as not having it's own rules, it's about not portraying it as something that we understand with our modern scientific understanding of the universe.

>>85166961
I'm not the Anon you were arguing with, but I am the one you replied to. My answer is that it's a sum zero argument. You either care about it or you don't, just like any adaptation.

I myself lean towards not caring since the distinction bears little importance on the grand scheme of things. I'd probably care more if this were the DC universe we were talking about since the nature magic seems way more interwoven into the narrative for certain stories.

>>85167026
>it's about not portraying it as something that we understand with our modern scientific understanding of the universe.
That's what the "This doesn't make any sense" "Not everything does. Not everything has to" line from The Doctor Strange trailer was about.

>>85167026
So it is a meaningless distinction.
Runes are just quantum code languages, and sigils are quantum circuits.
There, I have turned magic into science in 5 seconds.

>>85167090
Which is why I'm much more hopeful for the portrayal of magic here than in the Thor films.

>>85164213
>>85164301

Sociopathy and psychopathy are two very different diagnosis and it is ridiculous to slam either candidate as being either one.
A psychopath is someone who, in the legal sense of the word, cannot comprehend reality and is basically living disconnected from the world. The medical sense of the word has the affected hearing voices or scrubbing their bodies with brillo pads.

Sociopathy however is actually a desired trait among finance, law and even military professionals such as pilots.
However Trump is not likely to be a sociopath as you can see that he actually is able to have a healthy family life and for 70 no one has had anything majorly bad to say about him.

That leaves narcissism: A trait that you find in almost every single politician.

What people are arguing is whether or not they like the candidates personality and in the process are throwing around words that, frankly, they have no idea what means.

>>85167026
More or less this. This argument is difficult because everyone is arguing over semantics when the realities of the real world and the comic book world are completely different.

>>85167117
That was just you making shit up. When you start writing one of these books, then whatever bullshit you make up will matter because establishing the nature of magic and science can be important in these stories. Because these books have and will establish magic as being it's own distinct force from the natural world.

>>85167125
Same, but Thor one wasn't too bad, because you still had the Odinsleep, Loki's illusions weren't animated to look more like projections until the Avengers, and Frost Giantsmade ice with their hands with no visible machines.

It wasn't until Thor 2 that we got Dark elves with guns and speceships, Asgardian surface-to-air turrets and flying viking ships shooting lasers. God that movie was stupid.

>>85167117
Not necessarily. The working of magic in fiction, if you want to present it as magic, shouldn't be so easily simplified. You can't just throw 'quantum' in front of something to make it scientific anyway. You haven't made it science; you've explained it in physics terms.

Take the phrase 'magic is technology we don't understand'. The really focal point there is that we, currently, do not have the ability to understand the workings of it. Again, it's about presentation. The magic in Doctor Strange is best presented as a science unto itself, in which the terminology used within it's study is the most accurate descriptor. One would not go to a biologist to learn about how stars are formed; similarly, one would not go to a physicist to learn how to cast a spell.

>>85166990
It's a pretty basic logic, though, something that really can't be refuted by any level of human thinking. To accept, in the comic book, that magic defies nature and yet exist, you need to literally stop thinking about it and just accept it.
Because if you think, in any level for any amount of minutes, you'll come to the only possible conclusion that everything that exists has to be natural.
What you are saying is that to accept comic book logic one has to dumb their own cognitive senses.
We don't understand the internal logic and mechanisms used to conjure magic, because it is fiction, but the character IN the fiction understands. Strange knows the steps, he has observed and learned, he can't just make something up, he needs to learn how to manipulate an energy that was already there. This is scientific principle.
Yes, it can only exist in fiction, but even in fiction it obeys the same rules of everything else we know.
Supernatural is a blank term to easily express a few things. I think everyone agrees ghosts are supernatural, but let's say ghosts do exist, then they are functioning by natural laws because they are there, that's it. Supernatural is not a thing, not in reality, not in fiction.

>>85167250
You think the "science" of asgardian magic isn't people just making shit up? Please explain how Loki's holograms work? We barely have real holograms in our world, if you can consider some of them holograms, kind of cheating the term.

>>85167159
>A psychopath is someone who, in the legal sense of the word, cannot comprehend reality and is basically living disconnected from the world.
So trump
>Sociopathy however is actually a desired trait among finance, law and even military professionals such as pilots.
So Hillary.

>>85166999
>why the scientific method could not be used to better understand magic
Because it cannot be fully explained in many of these stories. You can figure out what certain spells and shit do and how they may react with other magical forces, but you will hit a brick wall when studying these forces. Usually that brick wall comes in the form of, "it draws power from a god or entity." The nature of magic breaks the laws of the natural world, superseding it with its own set of laws.

>why application of magic would not be considered "technology"
Mainly semantics. You would probably have to begin qualifying the word with adjectives such as "arcane" and whatnot. No real issue there.

>>85167159
You mixed the definition of psychosis with psychopathy.
Psychopaths are disconnected from emotions, due to brain deficiencies.

>>85160424
listen to his podcast. he reeeeeeeally doesnt want trump as president

>>85167355
I think it's pretty obvious that it cannot be fully explained because it's fiction. We are creating concepts beyond our comprehension so are literally impossibilitated to explain in our physical terms. Otherwise it wouldn't be fiction, it would be reality.
Would you say the stuff in Interstelar is magic?

>>85167281
The problem is that the crux of your statement says to insert oneself into a comic book and think it through logically when books operate on a different form of logic.

I get what you're saying, I really do, but the distinction exists for a reason. It allows authors to say that whatever magical force they're using operates outside any "resting point" of nature. There's a reason why characters in these fictional works will still refer to events or actions as "unnatural."

>>85167478
It all comes down to how the writers use this distinction. So in Interstellar, nothing is magic because the story is meant to be set in this real world. Labeling something as magic allows a writer to "break" the world at whim. Some stories may mix the two, but the presence of magic exists to be unnatural.

>>85167678
I think that a good distinction would be the differences between, say, Iron Man and Doctor Strange.

In Iron Man, though his technology is impossible by our standards, it is explained in ways that build closely on current scientific knowledge and is portrayed in a way that makes it look like something mechanical, that could be built by anyone in the modern world if they had the knowledge.

Meanwhile, the magic in Doctor Strange immediately, directly contravenes all of our current assumptions as to physical and natural laws. The fractals emerging in reality are completely at odds with what we know to be true. Both Iron Man and Doctor Strange portray impossible events, but Doctor Strange appears impossible at a more fundamental level, as more of our assumptions about the way the universe works are contravened.

>>85167587
The distinction doesn't matter as long as the mechanics are accurate. If Strange were using nanomachines and science or some shit you'd have a reason to complain but he's doing it exactly how he does in the comics regardless of Feige's inane ramblings about quantum mechanics. It's fucking magic.

Not the guy you were talking to btw.

>>85166276
Okay, fucking tell me, how asguardians aren't fucking aliens. Asguard is another realm, they are not from earth. They come to earth, from some place else, they are fucking aliens.

No they don't fly across space, from some planet physically somewhere else, but guess what, they don't fucking do that in the movies either. They come from another fucking realm.

They are, and have ALWAYAS been, by definition, aliens.

>>85166990
The problem is, if magic exists in these ficitonal universes, it is by definition natural, and part of the natural world. It exists in these fictional worlds, it is tangible, and it can be measured and examined. If these magical forces can exist, then their study is science, the harnessing of these magical forces IS technology.

>>85168425
I'm not the anon you're responding to, and I agree that by definition, they are aliens, but in fiction presentation is important. If a character could be described as both alien and a God, a telling feature of how the character was portrayed is which descriptor the audience uses after the film.

>>85168532
It's all a question of semantics and presentation at the end of the day.

Unless you go for magic as the simple explanation being somehow true. For example, a magician making a coin appear by literally pulling it from thin air, and that being established as the true explanation.

>>85160016

>The strange doctor.

Fucking pleb.

>>85167587
I accept that fiction is not held by any rules and even if the Marvel world is written based on ours, and therefore it follows the assumption that it has the same logistical rules, if a writer just wants to say "fuck it, it's unnatural period, ain't gotta explain shit", he can.
BUT
BUT
BUT this doesn't mean it's good writing. If the reader is held back by his skepticism "what? this is kind of retarded", then it's a downside to the writing.
Our brains will try to recognize things, to make it work like we perceive our real lives. So when I see magic on a fictional work I just see a higher manifestation of nature, until the author specifies it otherwise and when or if he does, I'll lose faith on it. Because it goes against logic.

You are right, writers have the freedom to do whatever the fuck they want, but if that means we have to just accept it, then I just give up on any further argumentation.

>>85168597
Gods in Marvel are almost always alien entities though. The only true God in Marvel is the one above all. You could also make a case for the Abstracts like Eternity and Infinity but even they are subservient to the Living Tribunal and can be killed or replaced, they are extremely intelligent and powerful but they are not omniscient or omnipotent.

Forget Thor 2, I don't want to talk about that mess of a movie. The reason the magic/science line is present in Thor 1 is not to dispel the otherworldly powers of the Asgardiand as simple technology, but to reinforce that they are not true gods that created, well "creation." They are advanced beings that are so far beyond humans that they were mistaken for and worshipped as true Gods when they visited Earth hundreds of years ago. But ultimately they are just powerful otherworldly beings. This is a common plot point in the comics contrary to what some people believe.

>>85168698
>For example, a magician making a coin appear by literally pulling it from thin air, and that being established as the true explanation.
I mean, yeah sure. That's fine.

'Magic' lets you pull coins out of thin air, if you know how/have the power. But that fact that the magician just pulled a coin out of thin air via magic, means that it's possible, and part of the natural order of the universe. Explaining how the magician used magic to pull a coin out of thin air IS science.

As far as semantics go, it's pretty easy to define magic as any force or energy that does not exist in the real world. The bigger issue is when magic exists in fictional universes and they call it magic, what makes something 'magic' or not.

Like, in a fictional world, what makes alchemy magic but regular chemistry not magic? Why is using a match to start a fire not magic? That sort of thing.

You have some universes where they have a form of magic but don't call it magic, because to them it's just a natural part of the universe. The Force in star wars is probably the best example of this. It's definitely real, it's there, it can be measured and studied, even if they don't, and can't, fully understand it. It's clearly magic to us, because it's not real, but to them it's just another force present in the universe, similar to gravity, or light, or time.

>>85160016
HE PUT HIMSELF IN THE TRASH THE ABSOLUTE MADMAN

Pen confirmed for voice of shuma gorath

>>85166577
Weight loss. Loose skin.

>>85162746
>But what he's doing isn't what's in the best interests of the USA or the world at large
Yes obviously what we need is less rights and more corporate cronyism from a candidate that believes that laws don't apply to her.
>It's in his interests.
It really isn't, he will be fine regardless as Huey Freeman would put it "he's rich".
>He's a cipher for the dissatisfied sections of the right
And the left and centrists, really everyone that is more upset by the actions of the establishment than the mean fuckwords that Trump says.
>he offers them a voice
Yeah how dare those proles speak their minds right?
>>85162852
Trump may be a moronic meme candidate but I think literally anyone would be better than Hillary.

>>85164560
torture has been proved to be source of bad intel. Even if the subject doesn't know anything he'll just lie to please you and make the pain go away.

>>85168994
And that's what I mean about presentation, basically. Anything that happens is by necessity possible, but what makes the magical 'magical' in fiction is how fundamentally it goes against our understanding of the universe. A man making a suit that flies with little jets on the hands and feet is impossible, yes, but it doesn't directly contravene on our immediate understanding of the universe around us. However, someone waving their hand and causing our perception of ourselves to suddenly appear outside of our bodies is a much more fundamental alteration of the normal. It takes something that we take, always, as a given (that we are inhabitants of our bodies and our perception cannot leave them) and ignores that basic reality.

>>85168929
>they are extremely intelligent and powerful but they are not omniscient or omnipotent.

But being omniscient or omnipotent isn't really the definition of being considered a god. God's in most of mythology have limits or weaknesses. It's primarily the Judeo Christain faiths that describe the "one true god" as being those things.

>>85165560
Man, I always took the original 'Science = Magic' shit as Thor meaning that his people study and revere magic (a la Harry Potter) in the way that we study science. Seems like everyone, director of Thor2 included took it as some flavor of "NANO MACHINES, SON"

penn looks like a deflated balloon these days

one of the few people that looks better with weight on him

>>85169213
I wasn't saying that Hilary is a good choice by any means. Hell, I'm disappointed by establishment politics too. But Trump isn't the answer. When I say that he 'gives people a voice', he gives voices to disparate groups who are often at odds with one another. As a candidate, he has very little principles of his own (something he has in common with Hillary).

personally I'll be going with Johnson

>>85169354
I get that, but it's not really my point. In those faiths the gods are still near the top of the food chain regardless of their flaws and limits, necessary as part of some cycle, etc. But in Marvel, while they are immensely powerful and godlike, can shape events and change the course of the world over centuries, etc, they're still just dudes playing around in the greater universal sandbox.

If you operated under the assumption that the Norse gods were real, and suddenly you found out there is these guys Eternity and Infinity who are conscious beings that are basically aspects of the fabric of reality, which the gods themselves are at the whim of, would the Asgardians still seem particularly godlike? Then you find out that Eternity and Infinity take orders from an even bigger boss? And that guy reports to another guy?

It all comes back around to perspective.

>>85169148
Honestly wouldn't mind him as the voice of Mephisto.

>>85160172
Is there any way to get rid of the excess skin?

Not all of it, of course, just enough to make him look good.

>>85169696
Surgery.

>>85166871
so there is a structure to magic... or not?

>>85169713
No options to do it naturally?

>>85169782
No.

>>85163935
>implying he'll ever do anything about any of those things
Literally every president makes promises to lower taxes, unfuck the infrastructure, help out the veterans, et cetera, et cetera, and they only get one of the smaller promises done at the very most
It won't matter if you vote for Hillary, Trump, or some amusing third thing, none of this stuff's gonna get done unless you MAKE them do it.

>>85165547
MAGIC flickering holograms

>>85165547
What flickering?
https://youtu.be/RF2BjlRwc8E

>>85169619
>Hell, I'm disappointed by establishment politics too. But Trump isn't the answer.
He is the only other option.
Johnson is just as much of a shill as Hillary.
>he gives voices to disparate groups who are often at odds with one another
And you don't think there might be a reason for that?
If I ever saw a klansman and cop and a black panther holding hands and running in the same direction I think I might join them because whatever they are running from must be some scary shit.
>As a candidate, he has very little principles of his own
No kidding he's an idiot everyone knows this but that's a good thing because the dumber someone is the less chances they have of conspiring and if they try you will see it coming.
>(something he has in common with Hillary).
The difference is that Trump is not beholden to anyone and Hillary is not stupid.
>personally I'll be going with Johnson
Johnson is such a disappointment the guy isn't even libertarian.

>>85169782

Once the skin has been stretched for a certain amount of time due to obesity, a couple of years iirc, it's permanent and your ONLY choice is plastic surgery.

>>85160172
He lost 120 pounds in like three months by crash dieting. That's why he looks like shit.

>>85163935
>All of that work for people he'll never meet he's doing out of spite for people he doesn't like?
No, so that people will kiss his ass.

Lowering taxes is also a terrible idea. They're too low as is.

>>85170735
>The difference is that Trump is not beholden to anyone
Are you a time traveler from several months ago? Because you may wanna update your data.

>>85170735
>Johnson is such a disappointment the guy isn't even libertarian.
Being a libertarian requires either great selfishness or ignorance.

File: image.jpg (60KB, 600x500px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 600x500px

>Trashman

>Hillary vs. Trump

>Magic vs. Science

We've done it, /co/. We've created the worst thread of all time.

>>85171478
>Being a libertarian requires either great selfishness or ignorance.
Explain, I'll make some popcorn.

what happened to penn!?!?!???

is he dying?

>>85171621
It assumes that the free market doesn't inevitably lead to a small number of people getting perpetually richer while everyone else gets trapped at low incomes.

Having wealth makes it easier to increase your income, so the rich get richer. The richer people are, the proportionately less they spend. These two combined factors result in money getting trapped in increasingly smaller concentrations, and at the same time it reduces aggregate demand by putting money where it's less likely to be spent.

Shrinking demand plus increasing technology means that you will have fewer and fewer jobs available. It gets harder and harder for people who aren't well off to improve their economic standing.

The inevitable result of an unregulated free market is an oligarchy, where the poor are at the mercy of an extremely wealthy few, and with no bargaining power have to accept whatever scraps these few give them.

Libertarianism's core mistakes assuming that negative liberty is the only kimd of liberty, and that only the government can be an oppressor.

>>85171642
he lost a lot of weight in a short amount of time.

>>85160620
but meh guru told me it's totally zen man, detoxes the pounds of rotting flesh and stuff.

>>85172074
>It assumes that the free market doesn't inevitably lead to a small number of people getting perpetually richer while everyone else gets trapped at low incomes.
What do you think the free market is exactly?
Also yes there will always be people that succeed but how is this any different from any other system?
The aim of society should not be for everyone to be at a equal level but for everyone to be guaranteed equal opportunities.
>Having wealth makes it easier to increase your income
Sure?
>so the rich get richer
Assuming that they don't blow it all as many new rich often do again sure, and?
>The richer people are, the proportionately less they spend.
I hope you're getting to a point soon.
>These two combined factors result in money getting trapped in increasingly smaller concentrations
There is not a tiny and immutable amount of money in the world and the rich are not dragons sleeping on piles of gold for eternity, even if the money that they spend is "proportionally less" it is still a lot and as long as they spend money that money transfers hands to others.
>and at the same time it reduces aggregate demand by putting money where it's less likely to be spent.
The rich still need all the basic necessities of life as everyone else they are at the very least spending as much as everyone else most likely even more since they have more of it to spend.
>Shrinking demand
What the fuck are you on about? A lack of jobs is one of the biggest complaints about modern america do you live under a rock?
>plus increasing technology means that you will have fewer and fewer jobs available
As long as that technology exists along with people jobs will exist, there will never be a point where every job is filled by robots even if it was possible because the main benefit of a robotic workforce is also it's greatest fault robots don't work for money and therefore don't buy anything.
A world where every job is held by robots is not a sustainable economy.

This is what happens until when you cut without lifting. Not only does he look weird, he physically aged 15 years. Fat Penn could easily pass for a dude in his 40s.

>>85172074
Continued from
>>85172440
>It gets harder and harder for people who aren't well off to improve their economic standing.
It is always hard to improve your standing whether it be in a free market economy (which we do not live in by the way) or as hunter gatherers in the savannah, the difference between capitalism and say communism is that at least in a capitalist society upwards mobility actually is possible while in a communist one you have to be a part of the inner party or else you are just a disposable worker drone.
>The inevitable result of an unregulated free market is an oligarchy
Actually that would be almost impossible in a free market economy (remember we do not have one in the world now and no country has ever claimed to) because in order for large scale international monopolies to come into existence they require regulation. regulation is the barrier to entry that prevents mom&popco from becoming mom&pop inc since in order to meet federal and international trade and business regulations means paying tons of money, money that small businesses cannot pay not only this but the only way that businesses get big enough to meet those regulations to start with is through crony capitalism or violence, in a free market economy there would be no bailouts there would be no government contracts that unfairly benefit a single company, the large companies you fear taking over would hate a free market economy because it would take away their safety net which is probably why they support the pro-regulatory establishment with campaign contributions and favors.
>where the poor are at the mercy of an extremely wealthy few
I would like to point out that this was all supposed to have been about libertarianism but all of your complaints have been purely about anarchocapitalism. In a libertarian society the people are not at the mercy of the rich any more than the rich are at the mercy of the poor.

>>85172440
>What do you think the free market is exactly?
A capitalist society, with a "pure" free market being one without government intervention in the economy.

>The aim of society should not be for everyone to be at a equal level but for everyone to be guaranteed equal opportunities.
Yes, and Libertarianism fails hard at this. It results in greater opportunities to those who start well-off, but few to no opportunities for the poor. You need positive liberties, not just negative ones, and the market without government involvement can't provide that.

>The rich still need all the basic necessities of life as everyone else they are at the very least spending as much as everyone else most likely even more since they have more of it to spend.
I said "proportionately" more. The poorer you are, the greater portion of your income you spend, with the poorest spending all their income. The same amount of money in the hands of the more will have more of it be spent than in the hands of a wealthy person, who (even with the most extravagant lifestyle) will have less to spend it on.

The lack of jobs is a problem largely because of income inequality. Those who have all the money have less inventive to expand/hire, because most of the population isn't buying as much, because they have less money, because businesses aren't hiring as much, in a negative feedback loop.

>>85172074
Continued from
>>85172783
> and with no bargaining power have to accept whatever scraps these few give them
Why would an individual with only the money they can make competing in a level playing field where any action on their part that upsets the market (people as in the average people you say will be victims) can cause them to lose their income to any of their competitors which due to a lack of government regulation can be anyone that steps up, ever want to bite the hand that feeds them?
Ironically for someone that claims to be anti-corporate you seem to think that people need coroporations when it's the opposite that is true, without the market or a sympathetic governing body on their side corporations are fucked, corporations need people not the other way around.
They are feeding on our scraps so if you don't like them, don't give them your scraps.
>Libertarianism's core mistakes assuming that negative liberty is the only kimd of liberty
What the fuck does that even mean?
>and that only the government can be an oppressor.
Well seeing as how libertarianism is a political ideology and not a social one I'm sure you can hazard a guess as to why it is concerned with government oppression rather than that of a individual.
Also a individual oppressor is much easier to deal with than an oppressive government.

Finally a gift
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-capitalism
They have some cross over but they are not synonymous

>>85172783
>the difference between capitalism and say communism is that at least in a capitalist society upwards mobility actually is possible
It's not, and that's the fault in your logic.

A person who is working all the hours they can at the only job that's available to them cannot improve their economic standing. They're trapped.

Regulations are not the cause of oligarchy and are absolutely not necessary for one to form. As I explained, capitalism naturally rewards whoever has more to start with. This means that whoever gets a head start will be able to out-compete any competition.

In a competition between a large business and a small business, the large business will naturally win due to having more money at it's disposal for advertising, making exclusive deals, and being able to take advantage of the economy of scale. Regulation has nothing to do with it.

>>85171339
They're absurdly high, especially on corporations. America has the highest corporate tax rate on earth and the taxes are ridiculously complex. They need to be lowered across the board. You can manage expenses with a lower tax rate by cutting government bloat, which the US is notorious for.

>>85173050
>the money they can make competing in a level playing field
There is your problem. A free market is not a level playing field.

Whoever starts ahead will have a snowballing advantage.

>What the fuck does that even mean?
Negative liberty is the absence of external obstacles. Positive liberty is actually having the ability to do something.

Negative liberty is when no one is stopping you from eating. Positive liberty is when there is any food to eat.

>>85173223
Taxes are historically at one of the lowest points they've ever been.

The US corporate tax is also nowhere near the highest. It's not even in the top 5.

>>85173028
>Yes, and Libertarianism fails hard at this.
You're confusing libertarianism (the minimization of laws on the individual that do not violate the non aggression clause) with free market capitalism again
>It results in greater opportunities to those who start well-off
Well gee I guess nature is oppressive too huh?
>but few to no opportunities for the poor.
Because Elon Musk,Bill Gates, Steve Jobs,Chris Gardner,Oprah Winfrey, and Mark Zuckerberg were all born with a silver spoon in their mouths right?
>You need positive liberties
All liberties are positive you fucking fascist.
>and the market without government involvement can't provide that.
A government with it can't provide it.
>I said "proportionately" more. The poorer you are, the greater portion of your income you spend
You later made the claim that the rich spend less in total.
>with the poorest spending all their income.
Then either get a better job or take a risk.
The purpose of capitalism is not insure that everyone be rich without risk nor should it since such a thing would not be sustainable.
>The same amount of money in the hands of the more will have more of it be spent than in the hands of a wealthy person
See right there you are claiming the rich spend less money in general, do you think rich people photosynthesize or something?
>The lack of jobs is a problem largely because of income inequality.
No you idiot it's because we place innumerable regulations on companies they cut corners by importing most of their labor overseas, bail them out when they make stupid decisions because they're "too big to fail", keep raising the minimum wage and in turn artificially inflating the economy (which is based on no objective value other than what the federal reserve claims it is) which is devaluing it worth on international markets, flood our country with unqualified undocumented labor, brought here by a drug war we fund for no reason so that we can incarcerate millions for victimless crimes.

>>85173050
>Also a individual oppressor is much easier to deal with than an oppressive government.
That's a major mistake to make. The Walt Disney company has more power than many governments do.

>>85173356
The US corporate tax rate is the third highest in the world and by far the most of any developed country. Only Chad and UAE have higher tax rates.

>>85173199
>A person who is working all the hours they can at the only job that's available to them cannot improve their economic standing. They're trapped.
MOTHER FUCKER I DID.
I was (Still am) working a minimum wage job I am now a millionaire, wanna know why?
I took a huge risk and invested thousands and through luck I turned that into 1.8 million.
It's not impossible.
But less extreme you can also get a better job I know they are uncommon but that isn't a fault of capitalism that is the fault of the shitty situation our country is in right now which was caused by what do you know? Government fuckery.

>>85173223
But that's not even close to true.

Why are you trying to cuck yourself for companies so badly? So you think you'll get good boy points if they see you defending them on the internet?

>>85160016
Holy shit, he really did lost weight.

Long are the days where I watched a fat guy rant about crazy people on TV.

>>85173462
Why do so many corporations stick around, then?

>>85173314
>There is your problem. A free market is not a level playing field.
It literally is.
What we have currently is not even because whoever has the most political favors can just do whatever they want without consequence, a free market forces everyone to play by the same rules.
>Whoever starts ahead will have a snowballing advantage.
Let's say walmart is the top chain store in the country and we live in free market land. Walmart decides that everything they sell is now laced with anthrax because they're a evil capitalist strawman. Nobody wants to get anthrax so I talk with a supplier and collecting some meager startup from myself and my friends we start Anonmart where everything is anthrax free. Now are you telling me that between these two choices you are going to choose anthrax stuff from Walmart?
In a free market economy the only ways a monopoly could exist is either through force (which would still be illegal) or by somehow being able to satisfy the entire market so thoroughly that there would be no complaints.
You can't bribe government officials to stop the competition when the government has no authority to do so.

>>85173314
>Negative liberty is the absence of external obstacles. Positive liberty is actually having the ability to do something.
So rights, so basically the non aggression principle you pedantic fuck?

>>85173583
A free market can't exist for any length of time precisely because of what you just said. The person with the most money just grabs the most power and imposes constaints in competitors.

Free market advocates are literally the same as communists.
>t-t-there just hasn't been a real one yet! You'll see! It totally works on paper!

>>85173516
Yes it is true you mouth breathing moron.
http://taxfoundation.org/article/corporate-income-tax-rates-around-world-2015

When corporations have huge, ridiculous tax rates, they move their businesses/manufacturing overseas, which means less jobs for the US. Also they're more reluctant to spend cash, and less investment means less opportunities are being created. This is simple fucking economics man.

>>85173581
There's a shitload of companies that have "moved" overseas, thanks to some financial trickery called an inversion. Headquarters move, and money is funneled out of the company to the new HQ country to avoid taxes.

>>85173390
All those people you listed had lucky breaks. They met the right person, got into the right business at the right time. For every one of them there are hundreds of equally talented and hard-working people who got nowhere.

"Get a better job" doesn't work when there are no better jobs. "Take a risk" is just telling the unfortunate to get fucked.

The rich spend less proportionately. A person making ten thousand times the money does NOT having living expenses ten thousand times greater, even with luxuries.

They spend more total because they have 90% of the wealth. They still spend less than if the same amount of wealth were in the hands of the less wealthy.

Raising the minimum wage is absolutely necessary and beneficial. Businesses have no incentive to spend what any given job is actually worth to them because there is a massive surplus of labor. It's actually beneficial, both by freeing up hours and jobs previously held by people who had to work that much to make ends meet, and by stimulating demand by putting money where more of it will be spent.

I can't believe your actually arguing for the gold standard. Gold has no more inherent value than money does.

Inflation is not an inherently bad thing, and is a good thing when you have more debt than savings (like much if the US right now).

>>85173536
Yeah, but he looks so gaunt now.

It's weird. For different people (men and women) losing weight has nearly perfectly opposite effects. For some people, being fat makes them look youthful and losing it instantly ages them. For others, being fat makes them look old and losing weight takes years off their face.

>>85173651
No. The non-aggression pronciple covers only negative liberty, as I said.

>>85173681
Actually in the US, high tax rates encourage investment because corporate investment isn't taxed. The company chooses between spending money on upgrading it's widget machine or just having the profits taxed.

>>85173474
>It happened sometimes so it will happen every time
This is exactly what's wrong with Libertarians. They look at individual anecdotes as "proof" that the free market works. Because no one who did all they could ever failed, and all my successes are purely because I was better than everyone else.

>>85160690
when libertarians prefer the socialist, what does that tell you about the other options?
although as another libertarian I'm all about Johnson now obviously

>>85173474
Doesn't the fact that you acknowledge it was a huge risk prove that it's statistically unsound as an economic principle?

File: sowell-complain.jpg (61KB, 674x495px)

61KB, 674x495px

>>85173670
>A free market can't exist for any length of time precisely because of what you just said. The person with the most money just grabs the most power and imposes constaints in competitors.
How does one maintain that power though?
Under what authority do they impose constraints?
>t-t-there just hasn't been a real one yet! You'll see! It totally works on paper!
The difference is that no country has ever claimed to be a free market while many have claimed to be communist.
>>85173701
>All those people you listed had lucky breaks.
That's what success is.
>They met the right person, got into the right business at the right time.
And?
>For every one of them there are hundreds of equally talented and hard-working people who got nowhere.
AND?
>"Get a better job" doesn't work when there are no better jobs. "Take a risk" is just telling the unfortunate to get fucked.
So you just want people to give you shit for no reason then?
>Raising the minimum wage is absolutely necessary and beneficial.
Raising the minimum wage accomplishes nothing, do you really want to pay $6 for a gallon of milk?
>I can't believe your actually arguing for the gold standard. Gold has no more inherent value than money does.
yeah let's just lie about the worth of our money after all resources are infinite, I mean if that's the case why are you complaining about the poor why can't they just make everything they need in their matter replicator!?

jesus christ

>>85173744
The capital gains tax rate is the same as the nominal tax rate, so they're paying the same on an investment either way. They receive tax credits sometimes depending on the investment but it's not like they magically get in a lower tax brackets.

>>85173474
>all the problems with capitalism are the government's fault
They're a result of the inherent problem of capitalism: As soon as someone gets an advantage, they can use that advantage to increase their advantage while leaving increasingly less for everyone else.

>>85173733
>No. The non-aggression pronciple covers only negative liberty, as I said.
Is "negative liberty" like how creationists invented the terms "macro evolution" and "micro evolution" to save face when it was pointed out they were wrong?
"N N No guys it's negative liberty it's totally different".

>>85160058
hes mother fucking 61 years old....what the hell guys, lol

>>85173583
>Now are you telling me that between these two choices you are going to choose anthrax stuff from Walmart?
Replace it with something less strawmanny.

Like light bulbs that don't last as long. Even if you sell better light bulbs, Wal-Mart can and will use their money advantage to draw customers to them instead with advertising, taking ideal locations, and making exclusive contracts that make it harder for you to fo business.

>>85173701
>Raising the minimum wage is absolutely necessary and beneficial.

Maybe, but not doubling it. That's fucking absurd. If you have a store that has 100 employees at minimum wage, and then that wage is doubled, then the store needs to fire 50 of those people to reduce the overhead on payroll to what it was to stay in business. Now the store only has 50 employees, and is half as efficient, but doesn't save any money on less staff. Furthermore, a minimum wage job isn't supposed to be your career. Nobody should have a minimum wage job for their whole life. If you do this, places that rely heavily on minimum wage employees will just simply automate and remove those jobs altogether, which we have already seen happen with fast food chains.

>>85173931
No. Those are two names for different degrees of the same thing.

Negative and positive liberty come from completely opposite directions.

>>85173839
>This is exactly what's wrong with Libertarians.
How is anarcho capitalism libertarinism?
They are two different but complementary concepts
Fuck it! ALL COLORS ARE GREEN!
>They look at individual anecdotes as "proof" that the free market works
Well no because it didn't happen in a free market did it?
The claim was that it is IMPOSSIBLE for anyone who is poor to succeed and then when examples were given of that happening you moved the goalposts.
>Because no one who did all they could ever failed
No they absolutely could you ignorant cunt but that wasn't what was claimed.
The point was it is possible.
>and all my successes are purely because I was better than everyone else.
Again no you fag, everyone owes something to others but the point is that it is possible when you assholes claimed it was not so stop moving the goalposts and take your ideological lickings like a man.

Here is how every "Thor is science, not magic" discussion goes

>MCU Thor is science, not magic
>If magic can be explained, then it's science/technology
>Magic shouldn't be explained
>Then they can just say some words and resolve the problem in a minute?
>No, there are some rules or structure
>Then magic can be explained and is therefore science/technology

>>85174010
Businesses don't hire based on how many employees they can afford. They hire based on the fewest number employees they can have without losing revenue.

>>85173908
Or someone who has an idea can get investors so help fund their idea. It's called entrepreneurialism and it's made pretty much everything you use in your life. Take for example Apple or even Microsoft. When they first came about, IBM literally owned the entire industry. There was nothing for either or those companies to compete with on that scale. And yet here we are. Saying capitalism is evil because sometimes people achieve success is moronic.

>>85174032
>The claim was that it is IMPOSSIBLE for anyone who is poor to succeed
Literally no one said this. I said it was harder and impossible for some. That is not remotely "No poor person can ever improve their standing".

>>85174068
Yes obviously, but if the wage was raised to double it's amount, then an employer suddenly has double the amount of overhead they did before. That will obviously impact profits, so they will let their employees go. Even if they had time to prepare for the transition, that can really only mean a reduction in the workforce.

>>85173908
>all the problems with capitalism are the government's fault
NOT WHAT I SAID AT ALL
If you're going to put words in my mouth I would ask that they not be yours.
>As soon as someone gets an advantage, they can use that advantage to increase their advantage while leaving increasingly less for everyone else.
have you ever heard of the concept of mutually assured destruction? If you believe that a free market allows one person to amass power than surely others could as well right?
And since the lifeblood of any company is the markets favor they would not want to lose customers to their competitors right?
>>85173989
>Like light bulbs that don't last as long.
Walmart doesn't make their lightbulbs though they buy them from other people.
>Wal-Mart can and will use their money advantage to draw customers to them instead with advertising
Then I guess I will have to step up my game huh?
And of course even if I go out of business the moment they displease the market a niche is created for competition.
>and making exclusive contracts that make it harder for you to fo business.
With who?

>>85174103
It's never impossible. Just highly improbable.

>>85160016
Wow. He did NOT look that old and wrinkly when I saw him at his show last week.
Stage Makeup does wonders.

>>85160620

Actually you can live on a diet of potatoes, water, and butter and get all the nutrients a human needs. How do you think there are still Irish in the world?

>>85174089
>Saying capitalism is evil because sometimes people achieve success is moronic.
Then it's a good thing no one said that.

I'm saying that pure capitalism doesn't work because it results in drastically unequal opportunity. Anon started by saying society should strive for that, but now the same side seems to be arguing that it shouldn't bother.

>>85174024
>Negative and positive liberty come from completely opposite directions.
Negative Liberty: You have the right to freedom of speech
Positive liberty: For realsies

>>85174103
>Literally no one said this
Read the thread
>I said it was harder and impossible for some.
>and impossible for some.
Like right now
>>85174163
As it is for anyone

>>85174161
>And since the lifeblood of any company is the markets favor they would not want to lose customers to their competitors right?
This assumes that quality and/or value are necessary to keep the largest share of customers. Yet off-brand products never sell as well as big-name ones.

Advertising is a multi-billion dollar business for a reason.

>>85160016

That he's a famous magician getting inspiration from a fictional one?

>>85174195
No, you dumbass. Nehative liberty would be someone letting you speak. Positive liberty would be having anyone to speak to.

File: jim_jones-620x412.jpg (63KB, 620x412px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 620x412px

>>85162852
Not really. He's made it this far by bullshitting. He's a natural born salesman and his audience is desperate for someone to give them answers.

His "speeches" are rambling diatribes and he has no policy. It's just a bunch of feel good nonsense that reinforces how special he is and how much you need him because you're in such terrible straights. Now that he's losing badly he's telling everyone that it's not your fault, that you were right all along, but everyone is out to get you.

Where have we heard this before?

>>85174223
How is your logic working?

"Impossible for some" absolutely is not contradicted by "It's not impossible for some".

>>85174306
His speeches offer more hard policy talk than literally any of Hillary's, and furthermore all of his policy outlines are available on his website. It wouldn't surprise me if you've never heard one of his speeches in it's entirety. Liberals are truly the least creative people on earth, if someone disagrees with you they're Hitler, or Stalin, or Jim Jones. Surely nobody could possibly disagree with you over anything, so anyone who does must be evil right?

File: capture.png (310KB, 612x344px) Image search: [Google]

310KB, 612x344px

>>85160016
>this movie literally proves God doesn't exist
I'm sure Penn's got a mega anticipation boner.

>>85174370
No, it just makes you foolish. There is no evil, only man.

>>85174370
What is Trumps position on minimum wage?

Protip: it's all of them.

>>85174590
He was open to raising them, but thinks that the states should decide.

>>85174172
> Then it's a good thing no one said that.
> I'm saying that pure capitalism doesn't work

So you are against capitalism. People try to split hairs with ideas of "pure" capitalism or "unfettered" capitalism, but the truth is that there is simply capitalism, or there isn't. Capitalism has created the single greatest expansion of wealth and standard of living in human history. Opposing that means that you want billions to suffer and die.

>>85174370
>>85174496
Also, having looked up Trump's actual policies I have to ask: was it written by a teenager? I at least assumed there would be hard data and a comprehensive plan fleshed out by his staff, but it's just vague and full of things like "Let's uphold the constitution" and "let's ignore the 14th amendment" in the same article.

>>85174793
It offers about the same amount of clarity as Hillary's website does. The numbers and nitty gritty of how they plan on doing this is generally to heady or complex for the general public, which is why neither candidates post their entire tax reform plans. This is not unusual, and has been the case for decades. You're a fool if you truly thought either Trump or Hillary would have a 400 page manifesto on their website.

>>85174922
I dunno, I thought this was decent.

https://www.hillaryclinton.com/briefing/factsheets/2015/11/30/clinton-infrastructure-plan-builds-tomorrows-economy-today/

>>85175581
This also tells us nothing about the specifics of Hillary's plans. It's just a lot of words and "did you know?" factoids. The only thing in this directly related to her policies specifically is the $250 billion dollar investment she would take to congress for approval, a number which Trump has doubled. The entire thing except for that tidbit is just "things are bad". I already know things are bad, I don't need it repeated to me.

>>85167159
>Sociopathy and psychopathy are two very different diagnosis

No they fucking aren't. Neither one is a true medical diagnosis. They both mean the same thing, and what they mean is basically the pop-science or journalistic version of what a professional would diagnose as "antisocial personality disorder"

>The first edition of the DSM in 1952 had a section on sociopathic personality disturbances, then a general term that included such things as homosexuality and alcoholism as well as an "antisocial reaction" and "dyssocial reaction". The latter two eventually became antisocial personality disorder (ASPD) in the DSM and dissocial personality disorder in the ICD.[citation needed] Both manuals have stated that their diagnoses have been referred to, or include what is referred to, as psychopathy or sociopathy, although neither diagnostic manual has ever included a disorder officially titled as such.[2][4][5]

>>85170761
nice to know i am deformed for life. guess it's time to kill myself.

>>85160046
Not for lack of trying!

>>85178616

from what I've heard from people I know it starts to snap back after several years of maintaining a lower weight, but it does take years as I understand it.

>>85174170

>implying the Irish don't eat Cabbage as well

Confirmed for ignorant american.

>>85165512
>hope the DCEU isn't afraid to keep magic a real thing with WW.

Kek, they went FULL magic with suicide squad and the critics hated it

>>85174922

Can you (or anyone else for that matter) offer ANY defense of Trump that isn't "But Hillary is a shit"?

Even if Hillary was a literal demon spawned from the depths of Satan's asshole that does NOT make Trump any more fit to be president, an attack on his opposition is not a defense of him.

For fuck's sake.

>>85162136
>in case the movie turns out to be a shitshow come November.
Why would it be a shitshow? It's not made by WB/DC.

>>85180051
He's a successful billionaire global business man. He runs a real estate empire which would intimately familiarize him with negotiating with governments, unions, and tenants. The importance of infrastructure is known to him again due in part to his real estate experience. He's an experienced financier and knows the tax code and legal laws contained therein, yes even bankruptcy. In the 90s when congress was going through a tax code crisis, they asked him to appear before them and help them unfuck said taxes. He cares about the security and safety of the nation which is reflected in his stance on immigration and the military, which also segues into his desire to reform the veteran's affairs apparatus. He wants to lower taxes on citizens to increase cash flow and lower them on corporations to provide incentive to invest in America, rather than elsewhere, which will bring back jobs. He wants to repeal Obamacare, which is responsible for a catastrophic rise in insurance premiums. All of these things add to his appeal, and none of them have anything to do with his personal character, which attracts as many people as it repels.

>>85180226
>He's a successful billionaire global business man.

Inherited his wealth from his father, is less wealthy now than if he had simply invested his money, Declared bankruptcy four times, ruined the economy of Atlantic city and numerous other ventures, and makes promises that are fiscally impossible.

Trump's policy on anything is not even official, hes made no concrete statement beyond lofty promises.

File: 7bf.gif (1MB, 900x638px)

1MB, 900x638px

>>85160424
THAT'S the reason?

>>85165891
Would he even accept it?

>>85180300
He multiplied the money he received from his father by thousands of times, the bankruptcies were chapter 11 which is a restructuring and not total liquidation. He was forced to declare bankruptcy because of the declining economy of Atlantic City, not the other way around dipshit. The claim that if he has simply invested his money he would be richer is also functionally retarded, because predicting market fluctuations 30 years in advance is not only impossible but also a dumb thing to attempt. Don is a real estate mogul, and that were his success was built, not dumping a million bucks into an IRA and hoping shit doesn't hit the fan. Furthermore who do you think you're fooling when you say he's made no concrete statement? Not only is this factually incorrect, but it's the political season of a presidential election. Neither he nor Hillary are going to go into specifics, presidential nominees never do.

>>85180226
We have been lowering taxes on corporations for forty years.

It HAS NOT WORKED.

>it's a "/co/ gets triggered about magic/science in the MCU" episode
I'm convinced these people suffer from a severe case of autism.

>>85180399
Tax rate is still the third highest in the entire world, behind only Chad and the UAE. There's still room for improvement.

Why does this thread still exist?


COMICS AND CARTOONS

>>85180414

Have you been reading the thread? It's all trump and /pol/ shit

Thread reported

>>85180417
lurk more

>>85180387
>He multiplied the money he received from his father by thousands of time

And he could have multiplied it 20 thousand times if he had simply safely invested it.

You can't win this argument, Donald Trump's personal wealth now is substantially lower because of his poor business choices. He could be significantly more wealthy had he not been so stupid.

> the bankruptcies were chapter 11 which is a restructuring and not total liquidation. He was forced to declare bankruptcy because of the declining economy of Atlantic City, not the other way around dipshit.

He declared bankruptcy four times because he's a bad businessman. He's an absentee landlord who cuts and runs when his lacking oversight. He became a reality tv show host because that's how low he had fallen on the totem pole in the business world.

>Furthermore who do you think you're fooling when you say he's made no concrete statement? Not only is this factually incorrect, but it's the political season of a presidential election.

He changes it to whatever the crowd in front of him wants to hear. He really is mercurial.

>Neither he nor Hillary are going to go into specifics, presidential nominees never do.

No, Hillary has some pretty specific goals. Her policy is clearly laid out. Trump's are vague to the point of being meaningless.

>>85180521
>No, Hillary has some pretty specific goals.

We've already had this exact argument in this very thread. The information provided on her website under issues is no more specific than Trump's website. They are both vague on purpose.

>>85178616
You can lose your excess skin if you're young, since your skin is still flexible.

Penn looked way better and cooler when he was still fat. Even if he were to get rid of his excess skin, the fat just suits him and his personality way better.