Aversion to Interpersonal Tension is Killing the West

>>If everyone with whom one deals is happy, then you're doing it wrong.
>No Jew. The BEST kind of deal is the one where both people walk away happy.
Nice fairy tale you got there. Reality is knocking, answer the door.

>But for instance, I make a rocking chair, customer buys the rocking chair for my price, and he is very happy to have my rocking chair and I am very happy to have his money for it.
This never happens- both parties being totally happy.
Only an American could imagine a scenario where two men mutually cuck each other.

>tfw the car salesman is a good actor going full "You're ruining me with that price!!" while ripping you off even more

Cooperativeness can only be built on a good amount of mutual trust. Now what you really need is a network of people who are reliable partners and where any form of outright 'treason' would mean either a harsh penalty from the other network members or even exclusion from the network overall. In an unregulated, competitious environment the wolfpack usually prevails.

Attached: I_feel_funny.jpg (500x375, 44K)

>Nice fairy tale you got there. Reality is knocking, answer the door.
Fairy tale!? LMFAO!
People do it every day. You can walk into any store and see it going on right then.
People buying things. If they thought it was too expensive they wouldn't buy it. If the store was unhappy with their own price they'd raise it or take the item off shelves.
Fairy tale? Only to a jew.
> This never happens- both parties being totally happy.
Happens every day all the time. Outside the world of Jewry. It's why you don't know about it.

>If everyone with whom one deals is happy, then you're doing it wrong.

No no no, faggot. That's not how it works. If everyone is running around trying to make themselves a bit extra by making everyone else less happy, then you're driving down social cohesion. I'd rather have 10% less money at the end of each year and know that my community has my back than have a little extra and see my neighbours in their living room laughing as my house burns down. In my culture scabs are looked down upon. Not as bad as pedophiles, but everyone despises them.
Why do you think antisemitism is rife everywhere? It's because you're the "other" that spends all your time trying to gouge people to enrich yourself.

The materially rich are the spiritually bankrupt.

Attached: 1518035277717.jpg (600x485, 89K)

>No no no, faggot. That's not how it works.
For a Jew, that's exactly how it works.

I'm surprised it's even legal for you to visit this board in your country. You're on a government list for sure. It won't be long before Jow Forums is firewalled in the whole of Israel like it is in China.

Attached: molynew.png (269x281, 99K)

> It won't be long before Jow Forums is firewalled in the whole of Israel like it is in China.

Attached: 1530274851952.jpg (660x525, 62K)

>people are unhappy with some prices
The American "one price for all people" scheme is tiresome- you don't understand value...it's not objective. Segmenting pricing is a good thing- but your MUH EQUALITY runs counter.

yeah i agree op.

>"one price for all people"
Huh? You mean we're supposed to be charging some people more than others for the same thing?
Why? Wouldn't that cause massive customer dissatisfaction if they found out?
You're so jew.

Btw concerning yesterday...

>monarchy or direct democracy

I propose geno-feudalism.

Attached: evilgasm.gif (400x267, 3.98M)

I mean how are we supposed to know what the value or price of anything is, when it changes all the time depending on who's buying it?
Wouldn't that make it 100x more confusing for everyone? What the literal fuck are you talking about?
Jews have low IQ. Tired of anything contrary to that.

>cooperative, treason punished
Yes. But most cooperatives are disallowed the power to function. Except the state-run cooperatives... if they can be called this.

>care salesman is deceptive and pressures buyer
Most of them aren't even good actors- it's that they have monopoly privilege (from state) towards both car makers and car buyers. As such, they have the power (monopoly to sell) without the responsibility (selling at price car maker wants them to).

>I hope Jow Forums enforces Israeli IP ban, so that I don't have to be confronted with their wisdom

In a thread criticizing aversion to social tension, you say
>wouldn't people be mad?

Pottery

>prices don't depend on buyers AND sellers willingness to buy at different prices

Wrong

>wouldn't it be confusing
Only to the retarded

>with their wisdom
You mean blind arrogance.
I mean you think you people were chosen by God or something. For what? To spread the word across the planet.
Christians did it for you. Because you are failures at your " choseness " .
You're not special. Just inbred.
Highly so. I assume the inbreeding has caused mass psychopathy in your people as that is usually the first sign of inbreeding. Retardation comes later and some Jews do exhibit this fairly well.

Attached: Logo-for-website-2016x2.png (550x260, 49K)

Absolutely - /that the presence of conflict does not mean there's something wrong/ was a major redpill for me. It came, seriously, from Hitler himself, although he's echoing Darwin:

This is 2m 55s in:

youtube.com/watch?v=-wjMmeNS9wA&t=2m55s

>Geno feudalism
Which genes are in pertinent?

>repent to God!
Man is God.
Americans are still slaves.

>Only to the retarded
So you advocate different prices and haggling all the time. Even though a second ago you spoke of car monopolies in a bad way, even though they do what you advocate.

>Man is God.
Wrong heathen.

thats really ironic coming from a united cuck

>video
Where is this passage from? What book?

Pol only pushes religion in order to push culture. So why do you push it all the way?

I don't know. I've only gotten 150 pages in, to Mein Kampf. I saw the clip when I watched 'White Tiger' for the first time. (stupid, sucky movie, btw.)

>So why do you push it all the way?
Because I'm a Christian. And have been saved by Christ. And I have a personal relationship with Christ. I'm not perfect. Or sinless. Or better than anyone else for it.
But I am a better me for it.
Jews can do it too. They can become Christians. They can follow Christ, their king.

Attached: 1503183843321.jpg (600x753, 43K)

Christianity is good, for its effect. And when properly interpreted, it's a guide to civilization.

But as for the existence of God... MAN IS GOD.

>But as for the existence of God... MAN IS GOD.
It says in the Bible your country would be founded in a single day. It was.
And many things have been fortold to you. Some have come to pass just as they were foretold. Especially pertaining to you, the Jews.
You should be more close to God than anyone.
It was your place.

>Jews are God's chosen people
Funny, coming from pol

Were God's chosen.
Your people have failed to do their job.
Christians have. They are chosen now.
They have done your work for you.

You can become Christian, when you're ready.

>MAN IS GOD
you got that wrong, God is Man, not the other way around, we both uneasy with my statement, so you must accept it.

Throw the Jew down the well!

When you AGREE on something, you should both be uneasy.

We aren't agreeing on what God is.

>When you AGREE on something, you should both be uneasy.
Such strange philosophies really.

yes but you are still uneasy no ? so am I which means something I said is right , hm ? impressive.

>two parties being uneasy means they have agreed on something
Brainlet

>MUH social cohesion requires communism
If true, then it's you who is the probelm

>strawman
Nobody said anything about Communism, kid. Feel free to try again.

>you can't be friends with people who charge you the market rate
False

>strawman
Keep on at it, you'll get there eventually.

>strawman
Nopes.
You say that enforcing market prices makes people unhappy.

No, you said that. In the OP. I don't even have to try and argue against you, all you do is score own goals.

Attached: 1515738456343.jpg (440x386, 37K)

>Which genes are in pertinent?

That is the question research still has to fully clarify. But by now you can even predict broad behaviour from statistical analysis of gene variants, even political leanings. Of course, candidates you want to select for/modify need to be verified in a way for their functionality. Generally, in a 'genetic feudalist elite' I would go for the following: high mental flexibility for adaptive capacity, moderate aggression and a behavioural pattern strongly reminiscent of a pastoralist, a drive to 'defend the herd' against competing groups. Maybe a second auxiliary class based on the capabilities of the priest phenotype but 'purer', freed of the host/parasite interaction, the niche they have moved into ... more a hybrid with the architect. Also, allow to pick promising individuals from the cattle and attempt to integrate them into the elite caste if they show useful phenotype.

Enforcing market prices doesn't compel anyone to buy from you.

What I'm saying is that if you pay too much, then you should feel cheated.

I see exactly this monopoly privilege as the first step towards decline and stagnation but I think we don't even have to discuss this by now.

Attached: combustible_lemons.png (372x551, 98K)

Yes. I just wanted to show the dysfunction lurking in new car sales.

What should be recognized is that genes don't affect what thoughts a person can think, but rather affects the sensory response (from , and from thoughts -> neurochemistry -> senses) that make certain thoughts more or less pleasing, and thus more or less sought.

For aggression, intelligence is key- aggression being the choice to achieve by force instead of cooperation.

Regarding genes, I'd think you'd want a smart population and allow segmentation wherever people sought fit. And you'd need to be able to exhile those who the society disliked. I believe Switzerland has something similar- where your community can choose whether or not to let you settle near them

Not only there ... I could name some examples from the area i am working in right now. Customers don't even realize they are bullshat (is this even a word?!).

>people paying too much

Thing is that any business can fail as much as any others- if others are paying too much, then you can do the same while remaining competitive.

>This is a thread for straights only.
the fuck are you doing here, then?

>Enforcing market prices doesn't compel anyone to buy from you.
That depends. Markets generate monopolies when combined with human social structures. If you are the only "gig in town", so to speak, then the choice between option A and nothing, especially when it's a needed thing, is no choice at all, it's an ultimatum.

>What I'm saying is that if you pay too much, then you should feel cheated.
You're viewing things from a purely material perspective. If my money is going to the people in my community, acting as a kind of indirect investment, increasing community cohesion by not acting so obviously in my own self interest at the expense of others would drive down prices if everyone played by the same rules and was socially enforced. The inverse too would increase prices, not decrease them. If everyone is out for themselves at the expense of everyone else, then that include business owners and salesmen too. At the end of the day you're right, but only when interacting with others that are of the like mind, which most of the time isn't true.

"Pay too much" is clearly subjective as well, as is all perception of value. And "cheated" implies that everyone is playing by the same rules with the same endgoal in mind, which they're clearly not.

The biggest failures of human political though (Marxism, anarchism) is that they can function only if individuals are all on the same page with similar belief structures, which based on personality and personal life experience isn't the case. Capitalism's relative success compared to Marxists was it's ability to force enough people into being cut throat, backstabbing, cunning , market thieves. Those that don't adapt in this current system are the ~40% bottom end of society who won't or can't adapt to this parasitical system.

This is the ultimate proof of a good negotiation, when neither side is sure they won.

Good post. This Hebrew knows what's up.

Real winners walk all over people and don't care what people think about them.

-serial entrepreneur

>If everyone with whom one deals is happy, then you're doing it wrong.
That's because you inbred kike scum produce low trust communities, you are parasitic by your very nature.
So having a community where everyone is somewhat happy is unfathomable to you.

>What should be recognized is that genes don't affect what thoughts a person can think, but rather affects the sensory response (from , and from thoughts -> neurochemistry -> senses) that make certain thoughts more or less pleasing, and thus more or less sought.

Exactly, Dr. Scott!! It is about zhe behaviour, not intellect.

Intelligence and the ability for delayed gratification only provide you with the ability to think up more options, follow more strategies in chasing the general kick your reward center is wired to crave. Then aggression is just the vigor with which you follow these strategies through or not ... it can be highly cooperative if required even. And yes, the Swiss have a rudimentary way of applying this system ... though here it still mostly relies on an 'educated gut feeling' and not robust data.

Attached: und_I_did.jpg (656x343, 37K)

Why can't I just buy from the manufacturer?

>then you can do the same while remaining competitive

Can confirm that. Compared to those established in the market I can still make quite a margin even with lower than average pricing. Though I have to say, I do not feel like ripping the customer off here. That extra he pays ... that's for planning and engineering. Industry just offers solutions off the rack. I offer tailor-made down to the smallest detail. That is the actual USP. And the beauty about it: it does not cost me much effort. It is simply my talent. Seeing patterns in the data. Finding the sweet spot in all the what-ifs.

Attached: tehehehehe.jpg (200x183, 7K)

>The only way of doing business is jewing your trading partner
The kike reveals himself just by letting his egocentric kike thoughts flow. Hilarious.

Because most manufacturers sell through intermediates as they do not want to sustain the high costs and administrational effort of a retail network ... instead, they outsource that part of business together with the risk attached.

Why is it illegal though?

meant for

Huh? Please elaborate.

>
>>Enforcing market prices doesn't compel anyone to buy from you.
>That depends. Markets generate monopolies when combined with human social structures.
Monopolies without government enforcement- laughs in Rothbardian.

>it's best to keep money in a community
So you disdain monopolies, yet advocate for investing in less-efficient producers?

>"Pay too much" is clearly subjective as well, as is all perception of value. And "cheated" implies that everyone is playing by the same rules with the same endgoal in mind, which they're clearly not.

Paying too much is not subjective- there is a market rate, and if you pay more, you paid too much.

>global markets are parasitic
Wrong.
What I would say is that government regulation increases cost in ways that the free market wouldn't do.

Nothing gay about raping heebs.

it is illegal in most states to buy a car directly from the manufacturer

>Real winners walk all over people and don't care what people think about them.
>-serial entrepreneur
True.
You can never win if you put others' opinions of you over your victory..which is what most Westerners do..

Ah ok, I was not aware of that. Could it have anything to do with car registration? I frankly have no idea about US legislature on that topic...

fpbp. get gassed kikes!

>Intelligence and the ability for delayed gratification only provide you with the ability to think up more options, follow more strategies in chasing the general kick your reward center is wired to crave. Then aggression is just the vigor with which you follow these strategies through or not ... it can be highly cooperative if required even.
And this aggression is different than violent aggression, in that while violent aggression seeks to win by muscle and pillaging, this aggression seeks to win by brains and production.
>cooperative
Where modern cooperatives fail is their inability to keep costs/benefits associated to those involved.

>
>Because most manufacturers sell through intermediates as they do not want to sustain the high costs and administrational effort of a retail network ... instead, they outsource that part of business together with the risk attached.
It's not that they don't want the costs and risks, but that governments say that car makers must either sell through dealerships or through the internet.

This is why Tesla has 'car centers' instead of 'dealerships' in America.

>my USP is that I plan for the future
The hard part is getting anyone to see it- and to work with you on it. To do any action, one must know it's profitable- Whites are different than nonWhites in that they are able to experience immediate pleasure based on future benefit...much more than others.

>it is illegal in most states to buy a car directly from the manufacturer
But you must have it shipped to a dealer.

>Monopolies without government enforcement- laughs in Rothbardian.

Yes, it's the Great Market Fallacy. Markets can only truly exist without coercion and degeneration when protected by a state that can enforce property rights and holds a monopoly on violence. And yet the corrupt human element within the state apparatus and within the market combine forces to establish schemes that benefit them both and generate monopolies.

>So you disdain monopolies, yet advocate for investing in less-efficient producers?
I advocate economics that is subordinate to the national interest. It is more efficient to ship industry overseas to china because the labour is cheaper. That in my mind runs contrary to the national interest and has lead to the socioeconomic deficit in the West today.

>Paying too much is not subjective- there is a market rate, and if you pay more, you paid too much.
That's not how value works.

>oppressed by nature meme

>value is not related to what people are willing to pay and buyers are willing to sell

You're moving back to the strawmanning kid, try again.

Aggression is only efficient with the ability for delayed gratification (what the typical cliché nig nog usually lacks). Intellect then decides what 'weapons' you have at hand (the defining feature of the genus Homo is that he is a tool maker and tool USER in every sense) and if you assess your risk correctly. I have to admit, although being more of a thinker, that I have a very (physically) violent aspect to myself. But I control it. And I do not deny it. I can use it in an abstract way if required.

>You can never win if you put others' opinions of you over your victory..which is what most Westerners do..

Interesting point pertaining to above mentioned...

Attached: dont_need_no_education.jpg (520x282, 26K)

Alright, read the whole thing. Yes, people in government conspire. Life isn't perfect, but reality is not a conspiracy!

Value is entirely determined by what people are willing to pay, not what people are willing to sell. What people are willing to pay has nothing to do with the market price. I might be willing to pay 10$ for x, but the total costs of production, shipping and storage could be 12$. The market price is therefore ~$12+ dollars minimum for a regular purchase. It is all relative to the consumer's subjective value system.

>
>Value is entirely determined by what people are willing to pay, not what people are willing to sell.

For any individual, yes. But the number of X sold increases if X costs less.

My last car purchase
>be me
>find a car I like
>2 accidents
>check underneath
>all original with no welding
>surface cosmetic damage but still reported
>low price low miles
>car literally priced to sell because it's a Ford in a Lexus dealership
>buy car
>talk to bank
>car worth more than price
I literally have equity in my car from the day I bought it. It's still worth more than what I paid. I've had the car for a year and can still sell it for a profit. Who lost here?

I noticed I am quite talented at selling these arguments by putting them into simple terminology and some graphical representations. Collegue of mine makes the joke that my presentations are all PFT-suitable (Politicians, Farmers, Toddlers) :D

>Whites are different than nonWhites in that they are able to experience immediate pleasure based on future benefit...much more than others.

Very strong ability for delayed gratification. At least in part of the populace. Something that lives on in the genepool still, I think it was selected for under the harsh Siberian conditions our ANE ancestors had to experience during the Paleolithic.

Ah, quite interesting. How did this come to be?

But only if X is at or below what people are willing to pay. It all starts and all ends with the consumer.

>Aggression is only efficient with the ability for delayed gratification
Yes. And it should be stated that it's said that there is a perfect IQ for criminality- but IQ is relative to others, and as such there will always be an IQ where people profit more from stealing, and are able to steal.

>I have to admit, although being more of a thinker, that I have a very (physically) violent aspect to myself. But I control it. And I do not deny it. I can use it in an abstract way if required.
"He who has the greatest ability to think has the greatest ability to feel."
-Ayn Rand (inexact wording)

>I literally have equity in my car from the day I bought it. It's still worth more than what I paid. I've had the car for a year and can still sell it for a profit. Who lost here?
If the private pricing for the car is the same or more than what the bank told you, then you did well. But you can never sell a car to the dealership for the price they'll sell it to you- take 2-7k off if doing so.

>it all starts with the consumer
The chicken/egg thing is nonsense- neither occur first.

The price is determined by the combination of seller and buyer.

>
>Ah, quite interesting. How did this come to be?
Political dealings I'm sure.
"The big guy will screw you over."

We're going in circles. If you don't want to accept the Subjective Theory of Value, then so be it. But markets are driven first and foremost by the subjective appraisals of consumer, not objective costs of the seller. If the objective costs of the seller were actually taken into account then there would never be any business ventures that fail. Clearly this isn't the case.