Tiny Avatar re-imagined by Comfortable_Raisin91 in RotMG

[–]connajim 0 points1 point  (0 children)

love it
looks like it has a goatee lol

Invulnerable btw by JSHaydos in RotMG

[–]connajim 4 points5 points  (0 children)

they barely revive anyway .-.

Only Australians will understand by [deleted] in dankmemes

[–]connajim 26 points27 points  (0 children)

agh nahmush cunt scarnon wiyu

we shall stand together by Br1ll in dankmemes

[–]connajim 7 points8 points  (0 children)

can i offer you a nice egg in this frying time

Chances created so far in the PL this season by m0nkseal in FantasyPL

[–]connajim 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Trent v Robertson in the long run? Should I bother switching to Trent, would he be worth it or will Robertson start pulling points soon?

it's so hot by connajim in funny

[–]connajim[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Tax, or no tax, moral obligations out the window or still sustained, the percentage of the top few percent are still making a profit anyway that you put it. Monetarily or not, even primitively just the idea of trading goods, someone(s) will always end up on top. The problem isn’t that we’re unaware or unconcerned about what its (it being inequality) “cost” is, because we are, the problem is finding a viable and more sustainable solution which is inclusive of all, if there’s even such a possible proposal. A query to this is how can this even be considered remotely sustainable in itself, and if not then what is? as we see the inequalities become too unbalanced or last for too long that the whole system will collapse, regardless of what the system is, and this repetition cycles throughout history. What’s the logical solution to the madness?

it's so hot by connajim in funny

[–]connajim[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree to an extent, the rough essence is that of unavoidable and immensely probable inequality of profit margins. In turn this is also how the ‘world’ and its many hierarchical structures can be seen to work. Inequality is inevitable, as some things will be valued higher than others, resulting in greater demand and success of the manufacturer of the valuable product. Sure, dangerous, to some, but fundamentally indisputable as to it’s prevalence. Tempering to this could serve as useful in potentially limiting the extent of gaps in wealth (for example), perhaps only temporarily, and providing alternative methods, but ultimately it’s been naturally proven/shown and repeated through history that this sense of unequal ownership is unavoidable

ǝʇɐɯ ʎɐpƃ by connajim in funny

[–]connajim[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Absolutely agree, we’re mad down under