Youtube TV

[DutchJazzer]

BTW



Alt13 didn't think 4k TVs will catch on. Actually the entire thread is funny:

https://jazzfanz.com/showthread.php?33762-Thinking-about-a-4k-tv

I can't wait to bring up that Mars thread when we're living in our sweet orbital rings.

lol did he really say that? but really 8k 12 k will prolly catch on.


i knew 3d wouldn't catch on just yet. for now it's dead. will be tried again in a few years. but ultimatly vr will make 3d obsolete before it catches on

 

[DutchJazzer]

Yes it is a lot like a burger joint. Try opening a burger joint that doesn't sell overpriced drinks. Let me know how that works out for you. The food is totally subsidized by an outrageous markup on sugar water.

PS the fries are often offered at cost to get you to buy one of those drinks.

really, whenever i get fastfood i never get the drinks! so i must be a free loader

 

[DutchJazzer]

It's pretty simple. If you use something and aren't paying for it...you probably shouldn't be going to the temple.

soo if i visit my parents for a few weeks, and i use their computer and internet subscription i am immoral and shouldnt go to a prayer service?


sounds legit!

seriously his parents ar epaying for it, wtf cant he use it

 

[DutchJazzer]

I don't know what kind of prices you find but those don't even make sense. Nobody charges $50 for a blue-ray DVD or $2.99 per episode of a season.

I know you're a troll but at least make it believable when you spew **** out of your mouth.


Sent from my iPhone using JazzFanz

i checked it while typing up that post. see im right about the per episode cost(checked 3 tv shows. some old shows are cheaper ofcourse but im tlaking about recent stuff


i did not check bluray prices as i did not check em in a while, but on that I made a mistake I see the newest titles are not about 50 bucks anymore(49.99) but because of 4k i see they dropped to 39.99. but hell even 20 bucks for a movie that made it profit 5 times over is too much. at least to me, some people have opinion that profit can be unlimited. but me personally from a moral standpoint profit should not be ,multiples of revenue! and in movie it is kinda different. sorry for not looking up recent prices for bluray
and i never mentioned dvd i think!



I hereby accept your apology


had to black out my bookmarks, because people might judge me and tell me i should not go to chruch if those are my bookmarks

 

[DutchJazzer]

How are the actors hypocrites? Because they made money from "the man" and want to help less powerful people (ie, minimum wage earners) have opportunities to make more money?

That makes no sense.

Why are you asking them to take pay cuts but then are for corporate welfare and tax cuts and cutting welfare?

That's hypocrisy.

the man makes 200.000.000
actor a makes 20 million
actor b makes 10 million
light technician guy makes 40.000 a year
chef cooking dinner for actor makes 25.000 a year!


actor a and b lecture me about income inequeality! meeanwhile they have more income inequality in their industry than in mine.


they should lead by example and take their salary and bgive some of their money light technician and the cheff. so their is less income inequality.

but no they buy 10-12 15 houses(which i think is ok, if you can afford it) but then dont lecture me on how we should help refugees. they can house more refugees in their houses than i can in mine.
if you are gonna lecture me, LEAD BY EXAMPLE!

 

[fishonjazz]

It's pretty simple. If you use something and aren't paying for it...you probably shouldn't be going to the temple.

I have a serious question.
Is using pandora illegal or wrong? I don't pay for pandora.
How about when I listen to the radio? I don't pay for that either.

(This question isn't just for you btw, just a general question)

 

[DutchJazzer]

I have a serious question.
Is using pandora illegal or wrong? I don't pay for pandora.
How about when I listen to the radio? I don't pay for that either.

(This question isn't just for you btw, just a general question)

as far as i know radio is paid for by advertisers. so it is "free", it is basically socialism someone else pays for your pleasure

nothing wrong with that kinda socialism when the person who pays does it freely.

but others might disagree

 

[b_line]

as far as i know radio is paid for by advertisers. so it is "free", it is basically socialism someone else pays for your pleasure

nothing wrong with that kinda socialism when the person who pays does it freely.

but others might disagree

It's not socialism because it is advertising, so someone is paying for it on the market. The part that is socialism is that you use the internet to listen to it, which is maintained by governments in most cases, so that part is a social good. (Not a good in the positive sense, a good in the sense that it is a commodity.)

 

[DutchJazzer]

It's not socialism because it is advertising, so someone is paying for it on the market. The part that is socialism is that you use the internet to listen to it, which is maintained by governments in most cases, so that part is a social good. (Not a good in the positive sense, a good in the sense that it is a commodity.)

dont get your panties all up in a bunch man.

to me it is socialism, because i never buy stuff because i heard commercial on radio!

and you are right in essence it is not socialism. socialism is way worse.


sorry to offend ya bro!

 

[b_line]

dont get your panties all up in a bunch man.

to me it is socialism, because i never buy stuff because i heard commercial on radio!

and you are right in essence it is not socialism. socialism is way worse.


sorry to offend ya bro!

Radio waves are socialism though, because they are maintained by the government, and licensed by the FCC. At least in the US they are. You should stop using radio or internet if you are that opposed to socialism.

 

[♪alt13]

It's not socialism because it is advertising, so someone is paying for it on the market. The part that is socialism is that you use the internet to listen to it, which is maintained by governments in most cases, so that part is a social good. (Not a good in the positive sense, a good in the sense that it is a commodity.)

Socialism does not mean " stuff the government does". Let's refrain from using Breitbart's definition of socialism.

 

[b_line]

Socialism does not mean " stuff the government does". Let's refrain from using Breitbart's definition of socialism.

I understand that, I am just trolling dutch