Jump to content
IGNORED

Dobra plata, dobro mesto, jeftin real estate


noskich

Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, ultra plasticni said:

To je zato sto u sev. koreji nema japanskih cokoladica, inace bi tamo

Već sam ponovio mnogo puta zašto tamo ne bih, manjak vegetarijanske hrane, dobrih spiritualnih učitelja i klima. Ne volim hladno.

  • Haha 2
Link to comment

Evo danas firma za koju radim najavila na sva zvona da će samo potpuno vakcinisani moći da se vrate u kancelariju. Znači ko neće da se vakciniše mora da traži novi posao. Demokracija i ljucka prava.

Link to comment
7 minutes ago, noskich said:

Evo danas firma za koju radim najavila na sva zvona da će samo potpuno vakcinisani moći da se vrate u kancelariju. Znači ko neće da se vakciniše mora da traži novi posao. Demokracija i ljucka prava.

Eto prilike za konacan odlazak u tvoju omiljenu SEA

Link to comment
On 22.9.2021. at 1:07, noskich said:

Vi koji ne vidite dalje od etiketiranja, ko je levi, ko je desni, i pokusavate realnost da ugurate u svoju ideolosku matricu, pitanje da li verujete Big Pharma koja planski gleda da iscedi sto vise moze novaca iz bolesnih i umirucih ljudi, a istovremeno sebe stiti pravnim klauzulama prema kojim nije odgovorna za nusefekte svojih proizvoda?

 

Zasto li se Fajzer toliko bori da eliminise mogucnost tuzbi za nusefekte svojih vakcina?

https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2021/sep/10/pfizer-accused-of-holding-brazil-to-ransom-over-vaccine-contract-demands

 

Pfizer has been accused of holding Brazil “to ransom” over demands to shield itself from possible vaccine side-effect lawsuits in its contract to supply the country with 100m Covid jabs.

In its $1bn (£700m) deal with Pfizer Export BV, signed in March, despite its prior complaints, the Brazilian government agreed that “a liability waiver be signed for any possible side-effects of the vaccine, exempting Pfizer from any civil liability for serious side-effects arising from the use of the vaccine, indefinitely”.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, Moracikus said:

Tako da antivakseri mogu fino da otvore svoj biznis poput mene i nema problema.

Cak mogu i preko svojih knjigovodja da umanjuju takse :fantom:

Opet ponavljas napamet binarnu logiku. To što neko ne želi da se vakciniše sa novim vakcinama ne mora nužno da znači da je antivakser. Masa takvih ljudi je primila vakcinu za boginje, polio itd. 

Link to comment
3 hours ago, noskich said:

Opet ponavljas napamet binarnu logiku. To što neko ne želi da se vakciniše sa novim vakcinama ne mora nužno da znači da je antivakser. Masa takvih ljudi je primila vakcinu za boginje, polio itd. 

Sustina je da ces da se chipujes pa pravac u javni transport ako zelis da zadrzis svoj preplaceni posao.

U suprotnom, otvoris ABN pa na pecanje kao ja svaki dan.

Ako nesto i uhvatis das odmah pola plutokratiji, ako ne nikom nista.

Link to comment
13 hours ago, noskich said:

Pa jel vidiš da sam napisao u kešu bez duga? Jel treba da ti nacrtam tu kuću još?

Tako možeš sa svojom kevom da pričaš, ne sa mnom, jel jasno?

Link to comment

Pravo u centar.

 

https://lareviewofbooks.org/article/neofeudalism-the-end-of-capitalism/

 

A property-less underclass will survive by servicing the needs of high earners as personal assistants, trainers, child-minders, cooks, cleaners, et cetera. The only way to avoid this neofeudal nightmare is by subsidizing and deregulating the high-employment industries that make the American lifestyle of suburban home ownership and the open road possible — construction and real estate; oil, gas, and automobiles; and corporate agribusiness. Unlike the specter of serfdom haunting Friedrich Hayek’s attack on socialism, Kotkin locates the adversary within capitalism. High tech, finance, and globalization are creating “a new social order that in some ways more closely resembles feudal structure — with its often unassailable barriers to mobility — than the chaotic emergence of industrial capitalism.” In this libertarian/conservative imaginary, feudalism occupies the place of the enemy formerly held by communism. The threat of centralization and the threat to private property are the ideological elements that remain the same.

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...