How do you know you exist ?

BLⁱ http://www.donttaxmycreditunion.org/big-banks-start-campaign-to-destroy-credit-unions/ check out that shit!
WBDⁱⁱ The banks feel that the federal tax exemption is giving credit unions an unfair advantage. Lol.

BL Right ?

BL Well, it's not a matter that they feel. It's a matter of fact : if you pay more taxes than some other dude you're screwed, because that other dude can then murder you on rates and pretend like it's your fault. Guess why credit unions can afford to not charge the 5 dollar per account thing BoA wanted to put in.

WBD Um. I'm lolling in the other direction.

BL I mean these fucktards. Credit unions make something like 2-3 bn a year from that tax break. They have ~ 100mn users. They gave them 5 dollars per head, which is 1/4 to 1/6 of their loot. The result ? "Oh I love CU!"
WBD They're not the same things. Dude pick a line.

BL If they're not the same thing, why do people move from one to the other ? Obviously they're the same thing.
WBD People don't move from one to the other. You can't join a credit union without being a part of said union. You have to be involved somehow. Specifically.

BL "On November 5, 2011, customers were to close their accounts at major banks and open new ones in community banks or in credit unions." First paragraph. THEY claim people do.
WBD Joe Schmoe Schloopy is not joining a cu.

BL Ya right.
WBD Well they're retarded and irresponsible writers. I'm serious.

BL But it's their own case. This is a "blog" paid for by cu dollars.
WBD Yeah, that's a point. They're sorely misusing said dollars outsourcing stuff that matters to people who don't understand what's going on.

BL But what is going on is that there's two groups, one being taxed. And the other has the unmitigated audacity to try and transform their advantage into something they mystically deserve, and try and cause a moral panic stampede against the David of this story.
WBD I think you're twisting things a bit (and even a bit veers the discussion off its useful course). They don't think they "mystically deserve" anything. They're (poorly) making the point that the groups are not meaningfully comparable sufficient to point out that one is taxed and the other is not.

BL Why would this be ?
WBD Because one group exists to make profit (and is taxed) and the other does not.

BL So ? This is not a valid difference. Government is functional, not teleological. It may tax on the basis of what is done, not on the basis of what is intended. Thus you pay gas excise for buying gas, not for "driving improperly dressed".
WBD Srsly? So then the idea of a non profit organization is utterly retarded and abusive unless you particularly feel philanthropic?

BL A nonprofit may not be involved commercially. That's the idea, that's why it's not taxed : because unlike the stuff that's taxed, it does not involve itself in commerce.
WBD I say it is not involved commercially.

BL Well if they can be used as substitute for a commercial endeavour then ipso facto they are.
WBD It's supposed to be there to carry out menial transactions for those members of specialist groups, as an alternative to them joining the Everybody Else line at bigass banks where ostensibly their needs won't be met. So the argument comes down to whether or not they're actually this "substitute".

BL Actually this is a surprsingly strong point. I'll have to defer, can't positively do anything about it.
WBD Interesting.

BL Isn't it sad when one lone copywriter chick manages to outdo an entire pr effort on her lonesome and at the drop of a hat ?
WBD Sad how? :D

BL Sad for them lol. I mean they're people with jobs, Janet! And secretaries!
WBD Lol not bloody likely.

BL And an honest if wholly misplaced impression of personal existence replete with sore delusions of self importance. Incidentally, what do you think gives the people the sensation they exist ? I suspect in many cases it's actually a misrepresentation. They think they exist, but they do not.ⁱⁱⁱ
WBD Um. How do they manage to affect things if they don't exist?

BL What was ever affected ? What, the yellow matter accreting on public toilets, that's it ?
WBD This is my happy place. No public toilets here plz. Say some chick can pick up an apple, for instance.

BL Big fucking affecting, what can I tell you. An apple was lifted. For all you know the wind blew.
WBD Well what if I actually see it? (Then she exists because I exist and I perceived her?)

BL What do you see, if you see it ? Do you see Alice lifting an apple or do you just see white noise of entropy ?
WBD I see some chick lifting an apple. Which if necessary can be diffused into white noise of entropy.

BL So if it can it must. Unless there's something sufficiently specific to make that unworkable, it's what it is. Basically the point is that by now they're unremarkable to the degree of their actual individual existence becoming categorically dubious. If I get a comment handmade by some poor deluded kid that looks exactly like scripted output, does that kid exist ?
WBD But this is more about your observation than about them. Or it could be about the personless "presentation" between them and you.

BL But they themselves get the idea of their own existence out of observation. All notions are born of sensata^iv, what else ?
WBD People are what they are, I doubt it's done much of any changing to satisfy this "by now" of yours, other than in terms of becoming more numberous.

BL It's more dumberous, not just more numberous.
WBD Lol.

BL In what sense would you say random nameless peon in German feudal system "existed" ?
WBD Well while most thinking people seem to have thought that.... I don't know. If we went to 1201 would everyone be supersmart?

BL No, but if we went back to 1790 they would be. Where everyone = everyone. Ie, no blacks, no women^v, no poor folk etc.
WBD Well then there's your problem. Anyway : he tended land, he had a family, he did what he was told (for the most part).

BL So he tended land. So did all the others. There's no difference and thus there's no independent existence. The village existed. It made children. Heck, the Russians don't even distinguish. Mir it's called. The community, it exists. The people... not so much.^vi This is a strictly European, strictly modern idea that people exist as individuals.
WBD You're not reading, on the cu whatever blog, the thoughts and expressions of Everyone. You're reading the hearsaid mastications of the poor, the non-white, the female. They named a satellite the community? Wtf.

BL Mir means peace, it also means "community".
WBD Ah. Hippies.

BL Order, of sorts. Hence both, peace and home. Total hippies. It always was a point of private amusement, for me, to see how fucking clueless hippies in search of expression were, of the much better, much finer expression 2-3 centuries prior, in rural Russia.
WBD ;p

1. Old time Washington lobbyst, currently employed by the evil ABA interest. Obviously. [↩]
2. Washington Bill Drafter. You know how both Senate and House nowadays pass empty laws to be filled in later ? You know how a few years before they used to pass 7`000 page long pieces of legislation no representative had read ? Well, she's one of the people writing those. Thankless job, to write what nobody ever reads. [↩]
3. Completely stolen from and referencing the "You think that you're talented, but you are not." line in SNL's "You can do anything" sketch. Not the first time this sort of thing occurs in this piece, either. [↩]
4. Yes, sense data. You can thank me later. [↩]
5. This is drastically unfactual butthurt bait, placed there to tempt the preopinent. She's too smart to bite, which leaves the point hanging. Lest the clueless misinterpret, it was certainly not the case women were absent, and quite arguable that women had the upper hand. De Gondi certainly thought so, and his thinking is far from minority. Also blacks are only mentioned to give crescendo strength to the baiting, otherwise it's much akin to wondering why Iroquis weren't more visible in the Sahara. Well... they didn't live there. [↩]
6. Any ulterior readers befudled by Stalin's tragedy/statistic observation are well advised to consider that the problem stems from their own very marginal, very narrow mental structures that prevent understanding of what the man actually said, rather than from some sort of deffect specific to Stalin. [↩]