Home | Community | Message Board

Magic-Mushrooms-Shop.com
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: PhytoExtractum Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   North Spore Bulk Substrate

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1
OfflineTripsten
Stranger

Registered: 10/23/17
Posts: 1,104
Last seen: 2 years, 10 months
Different kinds of economy
    #26887804 - 08/19/20 06:08 AM (3 years, 5 months ago)

So I’m trying to study and learn what different kinds of economic systems and ideas are like and I’m at Anarcho-Economics right now.

Can some one help me understand “Mutualism” better ? I’m having trouble wrapping my head around what exactly the ideology means in its explanations.
What would the daily life or a worker look like ? Would one be free to choose occupation ? What would market be ? Any information would Elbe helpful

Also as a side thing if anyone has any other interesting economic systems to look into feel free to state them :smile:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineKryptos
Stranger
 User Gallery
Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,263
Last seen: 36 minutes, 10 seconds
Re: Different kinds of economy [Re: Tripsten]
    #26888605 - 08/19/20 02:55 PM (3 years, 5 months ago)

Mutualism is basically libertarian socialism, with very little centralized market control, in which rewards for work are equivalent in value to the work provided. Instead of the workers owning the means of production, each worker owns their own means of production. The main difference between mutualism and capitalism is that mutualism (theoretically) does not have a mechanism of income by ownership. So, for example, if I do ten dollar's worth of work, then my boss doesn't get to keep nine and pay me a buck. Similarly, I cannot earn money by virtue of owning land (renting/landlording), owning a company, or owning stock.

The only way to make legitimate income in a mutualistic society is through valuable labor.

Which, in theory, sounds great, until you realize that the value of your labor is probably very small, unless you're well educated. And that in this society, if you are injured or otherwise unable to work, well...think of yourself like a horse that broke it's leg on the trail.

:cruelworld:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineTripsten
Stranger

Registered: 10/23/17
Posts: 1,104
Last seen: 2 years, 10 months
Re: Different kinds of economy [Re: Kryptos]
    #26889526 - 08/20/20 06:24 AM (3 years, 5 months ago)

Honestly , that doesn’t even sound that great. A system which decides for everyone what the value of their work is is what I hear, it sounds like capitalism with certain freedoms taken away.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePatlal
You ask too many questions
Male User Gallery


Registered: 10/09/10
Posts: 44,797
Loc: Ottawa Flag
Last seen: 3 hours, 10 seconds
Re: Different kinds of economy [Re: Tripsten]
    #26889760 - 08/20/20 09:30 AM (3 years, 5 months ago)

Trickle down is the best.  Massive basins of wealth on top going down at eye dropping speeds.


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineKryptos
Stranger
 User Gallery
Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,263
Last seen: 36 minutes, 10 seconds
Re: Different kinds of economy [Re: Tripsten]
    #26889761 - 08/20/20 09:30 AM (3 years, 5 months ago)

That's what a free market is. A system that decides the value of your work through supply and demand. That's the entire point.

Of course, in capitalism, there are also methods by which other actors that have more wealth can manipulate supply and demand for their own benefit. That's what price dumping is. Someone that can afford it sells at a loss to force out competitors that can't afford to operate at a loss for an extended period, and then once the competition goes bankrupt, monopolizes the market. Everybody does this to an extent. Often the first production runs for consumer electronics are sold at a loss, because they need the brand recognition to survive until the economy of scale kicks in.

In that case, someone else's actions caused the value of your work to decline to the point where you couldn't afford to do that work anymore, and then they stole your customers. In theory, mutualism prevents this by placing extremely high penalties on ownership/stockpiling through abandoned property laws, but in practice, it's like a lock. Keeps honest people honest, but that's about it.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineshivas.wisdom
בּ
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 02/19/09
Posts: 13,428
Loc: Turtle Island
Last seen: 26 minutes, 21 seconds
Re: Different kinds of economy [Re: Kryptos]
    #26890078 - 08/20/20 01:18 PM (3 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

Kryptos said:
Mutualism is basically libertarian socialism, with very little centralized market control, in which rewards for work are equivalent in value to the work provided. Instead of the workers owning the means of production, each worker owns their own means of production. The main difference between mutualism and capitalism is that mutualism (theoretically) does not have a mechanism of income by ownership. So, for example, if I do ten dollar's worth of work, then my boss doesn't get to keep nine and pay me a buck. Similarly, I cannot earn money by virtue of owning land (renting/landlording), owning a company, or owning stock.



I agree with this depiction. Furthermore, the main difference between mutualism and most other schools of anarchism is that mutualism is anti-revolutionary; emphasizing building within the existing society, and avoiding confrontation with the state when it is unnecessary. A character in Ken MacLeod's The Star Fraction gave a description of socialism that might have come from a mutualist:
   
Quote:

...what we always meant by socialism wasn't something you forced on people, it was people organizing themselves as they pleased into co-ops, collectives, communes, unions.... And if socialism really is better, more efficient than capitalism, then it can bloody well compete with capitalism. So we decided, forget all the statist shit and the violence: the best place for socialism is the closest to a free market you can get!









Quote:

Kryptos said:
The only way to make legitimate income in a mutualistic society is through valuable labor.

Which, in theory, sounds great, until you realize that the value of your labor is probably very small, unless you're well educated. And that in this society, if you are injured or otherwise unable to work, well...think of yourself like a horse that broke it's leg on the trail.

:cruelworld:



I would assume that being compensated for the full value of our labour would still be an increase over being compensated for only a fraction of our labour - with the rest of the value currently going to capitalists.

This was the major flaw of the old mutualism, but nothing in mutualism necessitates abandoning the poor and injured. In the 19th and early 20th centuries about half the population was too poor to subscribe to mutualist medical insurance, unemployment insurance, etc. Thus the state stepped in and provided these services and in the process eliminated most of the mutualist systems. Today, at least in the developed world, people are vastly more wealthy and the overwhelming majority could afford to pay their fees. The minority that couldn't? An intermediate step between the present statist system of social services and a fully mutualist system could involve the government giving vouchers to poor people who could then apply these to the mutual of their choice. A Solidarity Fund could be set up and people could donate to it. The fund would also provide vouchers for the poor. In time, state vouchers could be eliminated and the aid system function purely on voluntarism and solidarity.

That's the theory at least.


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineKryptos
Stranger
 User Gallery
Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,263
Last seen: 36 minutes, 10 seconds
Re: Different kinds of economy [Re: shivas.wisdom]
    #26890130 - 08/20/20 01:46 PM (3 years, 5 months ago)

That's the theory, and as we all know, theory is always great.

In practice, and this is similar to my overall concern with anarchism, is that it once again relies on honesty. The fundamental necessity of regulation is to deal with dishonest actors. For that, you need people who don't necessarily produce any value themselves through their labor, but their value comes from them observing others.

For example, in a perfect world, IRS auditors are a waste of money. You don't need them. However, in our real world, the GOP has been doing its best to defund IRS auditors, because it's easier to cheat on taxes when nobody is looking for it.

It's like the lazy IT guy trope: boss walks by the IT guy's office and sees the IT guy fucking about on youtube. Boss gets pissed: "What the hell am I paying you for?" Does the boss' email work? Does his computer turn on? Did the conference call go through? That's what they're paying the IT guy for. The more the IT guy spends time fucking about on youtube, the better they are at their job. If they weren't good at their job, they wouldn't be able to go on youtube.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineshivas.wisdom
בּ
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 02/19/09
Posts: 13,428
Loc: Turtle Island
Last seen: 26 minutes, 21 seconds
Re: Different kinds of economy [Re: Kryptos]
    #26890211 - 08/20/20 02:39 PM (3 years, 5 months ago)

For sure, and it would be fair to critique the theory - but it wouldn't be fair to lump mutualism together with American right-libertarianism by suggesting a mutualist society would treat an injured worker like a horse with a broken leg.

No one has ever explained why dishonest actors are only a problem for anarchist systems of regulation. Any system of regulation we can devise - both anarchist and statist - will depend on the actions of honest actors to function. To run with your example, the IRS is a statist regulatory system intended to prevent dishonest actors - but doesn't this rely on the honesty of the IRS auditors? Isn't that the entire concept of 'corruption'? Dishonest conduct by those in power.

I still plan to return to my syllogism for anarchy thread, because some of the criticisms you bring up here you also brought up there too - but we're coming up on fall in the Yukon so my posting will continue to be sporadic while I prepare for winter - but I do plan to answer your questions you left there eventually. 

But until then, can you explain why dishonesty is a problem unique to anarchist systems of organisation?


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineKryptos
Stranger
 User Gallery
Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,263
Last seen: 36 minutes, 10 seconds
Re: Different kinds of economy [Re: shivas.wisdom]
    #26890382 - 08/20/20 04:53 PM (3 years, 5 months ago)

It's not a unique problem, it's a problem of scale. Or, checks and balances.

There is no fundamentally perfect system. That's just a basic fact. On a long enough timeline, everything ends. The question is the length of said timeline.

So, there are two approaches to prevent corruption.

First, you can have one incorruptible guy in charge. Problem with this is that nobody really fits that description. If someone was found that does fit that description, then that gives us a useful working period of one human lifetime, which has recently dropped to ~78.5 years in the US.

Second, you have a system that absolutely resists change, by virtue of bureaucracy. This has inherent flaws in the fact that what it considered "good" today, may not be tomorrow. This is the way of religion. Of course, you'd be hard pressed to find a single christian that, for example, supports the Gospel of Judah (which argues that earthly religion fundamentally worships Satan, because mortals are not pure enough to truly understand the word of God) or the Book of Enoch (which bans metalworking, jewelry, and soap). Hell, even some of the widely accepted texts ban wearing clothes made of mixed fabrics.

Ideally, you have some sort of balance. this is honestly one of the strengths of the US system. It's slow, cumbersome, and resistant to change...which is why it took the GOP damn near 60 years of erosion of social norms, mixing religion into government, and selling the idea that you owed society nothing, and society owes you nothing, to get to Trump.

Every system will eventually be corrupted, if there is a determined enough group of people. However, the more people are involved in that system, the longer it takes for the rot to spread, and the more places that the rot can be stopped. This means it takes larger and larger organized groups to take down the system.

Another example would be the Earth, as a whole. Personally, I seriously doubt that humans can wipe out all life on earth, no matter how hard we try. Climate change will do a lot of damage and destabilize the biosphere, and it will likely lead to the extinction of humanity, but not all life. Total nuclear bombardment from every nuclear stockpile on earth will similarly do massive damage, but it will not completely extinguish all life. Some roach, some bacteria, some algae, somewhere, will survive and reproduce.

On the other hand, a celestial collision on par with what is hypothesized to have created the moon, or the sun becoming a red giant, or similarly massive cosmic events can destroy all life on earth as we know it.

The more complex, the more resistant to change, a system is, the more likely it is to resist corruption. Anarchic systems are inherently not complex, as they do not recognize the hierarchical structures required for that level of complexity.

Similarly, this is why I reject your opening assertion that a mutualist society would treat a worker that is no longer able to produce value any differently than a horse with a broken leg. The entire system is based on the idea that your value is inherently tied to your labor. That's it. You don't get any special benefits for owning something or being alive. Someone that is unable to provide useful labor no longer has any value in such a society, and can be freely discarded. It's a simple transaction of supply and demand. If you are unable to meet the demand, then you do not get the supply. As humans do not live in a state of complete stasis, and water, food, and shelter all cost something, this means that someone who is unable to provide value is not eligible to receive the benefits of food, water, or shelter.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineshivas.wisdom
בּ
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 02/19/09
Posts: 13,428
Loc: Turtle Island
Last seen: 26 minutes, 21 seconds
Re: Different kinds of economy [Re: Kryptos] * 1
    #26890530 - 08/20/20 06:30 PM (3 years, 5 months ago)

I agree that there is no fundamentally perfect system (that was my first syllogism for anarchy) but are "one incorruptible guy in charge" and "a system that absolutely resists change" really the only two approaches to preventing corruption?

Later you state: "Every system will eventually be corrupted, if there is a determined enough group of people. However, the more people are involved in that system, the longer it takes for the rot to spread, and the more places that the rot can be stopped. This means it takes larger and larger organized groups to take down the system.". That seems like a third alternative, no? It's also a perfect description of decentralization - a core concept of anarchist organizing - and very similar to my second syllogism for anarchy:

1st premise: If all systems of checks-and-balances designed to prevent abuse of authority are fallible, given enough time every position of authority will be abused. Every system will eventually be corrupted, if there is a determined enough group of people.
2nd premise: Abuse of authority is amplified by concentration of authority. However, the more people are involved in that system, the longer it takes for the rot to spread, and the more places that the rot can be stopped.
Conclusion: Therefore a system of horizontal organizational structure that limits the concentration of authority will be more effective at limiting abuse of authority than a hierarchical organizational structure would.

Except how we choose to apply 'anarchy', it seems we are arguing the same thing here. Can you explain how our arguments differ?

Statements like this are genuinely baffling: "Anarchic systems are inherently not complex, as they do not recognize the hierarchical structures required for that level of complexity." I would argue that anarchist systems are inherently more complex because they contain more moving parts (direct human participants) than a hierarchical system. Have you ever tried to reach consensus with a large group of people? As you increase the severity of the hierarchy, you decrease the amount of humans directly participating - decreasing complexity and increasing efficiency - with a dictatorship being on the far side of the spectrum and anarchism on the other. And I would say that, even if you are correct, the claim that 'hierarchy is necessary for complexity' seems specious. For example, using your example of the Earth, as a whole, the complexity of life on this planet is much better described as food web than a food chain.


--------------------


Edited by shivas.wisdom (08/20/20 06:52 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineKryptos
Stranger
 User Gallery
Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,263
Last seen: 36 minutes, 10 seconds
Re: Different kinds of economy [Re: shivas.wisdom]
    #26890552 - 08/20/20 06:46 PM (3 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

Have you ever tried to reach consensus with a large group of people? As you increase the severity of the hierarchy, you decrease the amount of humans directly participating - decreasing complexity and increasing efficiency - with a dictatorship being on the far side of the spectrum and anarchism on the other.




Yes. It's like herding cats. Which is why a pure anarchy would not be a society. It would be a series of infighting tribes. If a group of a dozen people have trouble picking a restaurant, how would a group of millions reach a consensus on the amount of money that they should spend on, let's say, sewage treatment?

How much do you, personally, know about shit?

Shit is possibly the most important thing in a human society. Honestly, it's more important than food. There is, and has been throughout history, a direct correlation between sewer technology and population density.

Do you consider yourself well informed enough on the logistics of shit to decide on how to collect, process, and properly deal with, for example, one kiloton of dried shit per day? That's what New York City has to deal with. 1.3 Billion gallons of sewage, every day. Distilled down into a little over 1,000 tons of dehydrated shit. Every day.

Now remember, delegating that to professionals would be creating a hierarchy. They'd be making decisions about your output without your input.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineshivas.wisdom
בּ
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 02/19/09
Posts: 13,428
Loc: Turtle Island
Last seen: 26 minutes, 21 seconds
Re: Different kinds of economy [Re: shivas.wisdom]
    #26890558 - 08/20/20 06:49 PM (3 years, 5 months ago)

Not to completely derail the thread from mutualism,

You state that "the entire system is based on the idea that your value is inherently tied to your labor," and with that understanding I can see how you would reach your conclusion. Better phrasing would be "the entire system is based on the idea that when a worker sells the product of their labor, they should receive money, goods, or services in exchange that are equal in economic value."

Human life still has intrinsic value in a mutualist society.


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineshivas.wisdom
בּ
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 02/19/09
Posts: 13,428
Loc: Turtle Island
Last seen: 26 minutes, 21 seconds
Re: Different kinds of economy [Re: Kryptos] * 1
    #26890588 - 08/20/20 07:15 PM (3 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

Kryptos said:
Quote:

Have you ever tried to reach consensus with a large group of people? As you increase the severity of the hierarchy, you decrease the amount of humans directly participating - decreasing complexity and increasing efficiency - with a dictatorship being on the far side of the spectrum and anarchism on the other.




Yes. It's like herding cats. Which is why a pure anarchy would not be a society. It would be a series of infighting tribes. If a group of a dozen people have trouble picking a restaurant, how would a group of millions reach a consensus on the amount of money that they should spend on, let's say, sewage treatment?

How much do you, personally, know about shit?

Shit is possibly the most important thing in a human society. Honestly, it's more important than food. There is, and has been throughout history, a direct correlation between sewer technology and population density.

Do you consider yourself well informed enough on the logistics of shit to decide on how to collect, process, and properly deal with, for example, one kiloton of dried shit per day? That's what New York City has to deal with. 1.3 Billion gallons of sewage, every day. Distilled down into a little over 1,000 tons of dehydrated shit. Every day.

Now remember, delegating that to professionals would be creating a hierarchy. They'd be making decisions about your output without your input.



There's a fundamental difference between defering to professional expertise on a specific task, and the abstract authority of a political ruler.

"Does it follow that I reject all authority? Far from me such a thought. In the matter of boots, I refer to the authority of the bootmaker; concerning houses, canals, or railroads, I consult that of the architect or engineer. For such or such special knowledge I apply to such or such a savant. But I allow neither the bootmaker nor the architect nor the savant to impose his authority upon me. I listen to them freely and with all the respect merited by their intelligence, their character, their knowledge, reserving always my incontestable right of criticism censure. I do not content myself with consulting authority in any special branch; I consult several; I compare their opinions, and choose that which seems to me the soundest. But I recognize no infallible authority, even in special questions; consequently, whatever respect I may have for the honesty and the sincerity of such or such an individual, I have no absolute faith in any person. Such a faith would be fatal to my reason, to my liberty, and even to the success of my undertakings; it would immediately transform me into a stupid slave, an instrument of the will and interests of others."

- God and the State, Michail Bakunin




Also, you didn't answer my question about how exactly our two arguments (yours highlighted in red) are different:

1st premise: If all systems of checks-and-balances designed to prevent abuse of authority are fallible, given enough time every position of authority will be abused. Every system will eventually be corrupted, if there is a determined enough group of people.
2nd premise: Abuse of authority is amplified by concentration of authority. However, the more people are involved in that system, the longer it takes for the rot to spread, and the more places that the rot can be stopped.
Conclusion: Therefore a system of horizontal organizational structure that limits the concentration of authority will be more effective at limiting abuse of authority than a hierarchical organizational structure would.


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineKryptos
Stranger
 User Gallery
Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,263
Last seen: 36 minutes, 10 seconds
Re: Different kinds of economy [Re: shivas.wisdom]
    #26890739 - 08/20/20 08:49 PM (3 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
Not to completely derail the thread from mutualism,

You state that "the entire system is based on the idea that your value is inherently tied to your labor," and with that understanding I can see how you would reach your conclusion. Better phrasing would be "the entire system is based on the idea that when a worker sells the product of their labor, they should receive money, goods, or services in exchange that are equal in economic value."

Human life still has intrinsic value in a mutualist society.




Says who?

My labor, my value, and fuck you. Why the hell should I share? Get a job, ya bum.

Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
1st premise: If all systems of checks-and-balances designed to prevent abuse of authority are fallible, given enough time every position of authority will be abused. Every system will eventually be corrupted, if there is a determined enough group of people.
2nd premise: Abuse of authority is amplified by concentration of authority. However, the more people are involved in that system, the longer it takes for the rot to spread, and the more places that the rot can be stopped.
Conclusion: Therefore a system of horizontal organizational structure that limits the concentration of authority will be more effective at limiting abuse of authority than a hierarchical organizational structure would.




I don't see how your our premises connect to your conclusion. See above argument as to why I don't value your life.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineBrian Jones
Club 27
Male User Gallery


Registered: 12/18/12
Posts: 12,340
Loc: attending Snake Church
Last seen: 5 hours, 18 minutes
Re: Different kinds of economy [Re: Kryptos]
    #26891063 - 08/21/20 04:15 AM (3 years, 5 months ago)

I like the idea of anarcho-syndicalism, but the U.S. has mostly destroyed organized labor so it's hard to envision a starting point.


--------------------
"The Rolling Stones will break up over Brian Jones' dead body"    John Lennon

I don't want no commies in my car. No Christians either.

The worst thing about corruption is that it works so well,


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineTripsten
Stranger

Registered: 10/23/17
Posts: 1,104
Last seen: 2 years, 10 months
Re: Different kinds of economy [Re: Brian Jones]
    #26891280 - 08/21/20 08:33 AM (3 years, 5 months ago)

Slightly off topic from what the discussion is at current but on topic over all.

I play with the idea on paper of economy ( likely of a small community type setting in a scenario where living is mostly multiple small community style “governments” )

But a currency based economy where wage and price of good is left completely up to the individual either paying for the service or selling the good ?

At first one would say something bland like “well no then some one could just pay you 4$ for 10$ of work )

But then that guy wouldn’t really have employees for very long would they?

Same to one selling thigns way overpriced.

I feel a system like this when more fleshed out and developed would allow the people pure ability to decide the value of their dollar


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineKryptos
Stranger
 User Gallery
Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,263
Last seen: 36 minutes, 10 seconds
Re: Different kinds of economy [Re: Tripsten]
    #26891397 - 08/21/20 09:48 AM (3 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

Brian Jones said:
I like the idea of anarcho-syndicalism, but the U.S. has mostly destroyed organized labor so it's hard to envision a starting point.




Starting point would be very simple. Company scrip. Company housing. Company food. Company sewer.

Of course, if your company doesn't have the resources to put that together, then they better bust out some bootstraps!

Quote:

Tripsten said:
Slightly off topic from what the discussion is at current but on topic over all.

I play with the idea on paper of economy ( likely of a small community type setting in a scenario where living is mostly multiple small community style “governments” )

But a currency based economy where wage and price of good is left completely up to the individual either paying for the service or selling the good ?

At first one would say something bland like “well no then some one could just pay you 4$ for 10$ of work )

But then that guy wouldn’t really have employees for very long would they?

Same to one selling thigns way overpriced.

I feel a system like this when more fleshed out and developed would allow the people pure ability to decide the value of their dollar




You assume all prices are elastic, which they are not. For example, when the price of food goes up, I can't just choose to not eat. Same with wages. There is always someone desperate enough to work cheaper, though you will have high turnover until the market adjusts so people are happy making less. It's like how minimum wage, if it kept up with inflation, would be something around 22$/hr today. It's not, because people have gotten used to getting paid less.

This is why the US medical system is so effective at price gouging. People that need healthcare will sign anything and go into any amount of debt to stay alive. Which is also helped by societal pressure/views on euthanasia or suicide. Remember that DNR tattoo case from a few years back? Imagine what happens when you decide to forego treatment for an easily treatable disease. Society really doesn't like that. It's why suicide has always been considered a sin, or wrong, or more recently, a pathology that someone is a victim of. It's a social self defense mechanism. "Why did they commit suicide?" "They were depressed." "How do you know?" "They committed suicide". It becomes the problem of the person that committed suicide: They were a sinner, or they were sick. It is never caused by external pressure from the society.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1

Shop: PhytoExtractum Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   North Spore Bulk Substrate


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Is this it for the economy? FrankieJustTrypt 1,148 14 06/03/04 03:06 PM
by BleaK
* The RICH economy Edame 1,392 5 02/20/04 04:05 PM
by Edame
* Thank you Bush for fucking our economy
( 1 2 all )
RadioActiveSlug 2,132 28 04/12/03 01:41 PM
by diggitydankman
* Research on conservatives finds them 'less complex'.
( 1 2 3 all )
Edame 3,538 41 07/30/03 03:53 PM
by Phred
* Bush to America..."unemployment will help the economy"
( 1 2 all )
carbonhoots 5,446 38 02/12/04 08:41 PM
by Phred
* What will happen to the economy when robots take over?
( 1 2 all )
Baby_Hitler 2,340 25 09/01/03 12:49 PM
by z@z.com
* What should the economy be like?
( 1 2 all )
RandalFlagg 1,799 23 10/28/04 08:39 AM
by deafpanda
* U.S-Led Forces Occupy Baghdad Complex Filled With Chemical A wingnutx 658 1 04/25/03 05:31 PM
by wingnutx

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
422 topic views. 1 members, 6 guests and 1 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.028 seconds spending 0.007 seconds on 14 queries.