Pretty much any version of two besides The World Warrior (too slow) and any version on a Playstation console (I don't really like the PS controller for Street Fighter).
my experience with flea markets and old games is pretty bad... Usually the stuff they have is very common with niche appeal (i.e. lots of old sports games, I mean, I like SNES hockey games, but I only really need one)
I got if off of ebay for about 60$ five years ago.. It is one of my favorite games; a game so endearing and with such personality will probably never be seen again.. Enjoy it.
I am taking an ethical approach to it. I see individuals with rare and desirable skillsets and I make the determination that we shiould not limit for how much they can sell their labor to individuals whom are willing to pay. It would be unethical to tell Hank that he is not allowed to sell his lawful labor for less than Tim's lawful labor. Simply because your flawed ethics don't line up with my ethics does not mean that I am not considering ethics.
[QUOTE="RuroKen4Life"]
So what?
[QUOTE="RuroKen4Life"] And you know what, screw the market, athletes who make hundreds of millions of dollars do not deserve it compared to other people who make less money doing more noble things. Maybe you can prove it from an economic standpoint, but not from an ethical one... thegerg
Yes I can prove that, and I already have.
Yes, you are trivializing average people because to say that one's salary could go to a better cause is demeaning, for most people if they didn't have a paycheck they would have nothing. I am also not arguing for athletes to be paid nothing, it just does not need to be millions of dollars. RuroKen4Life
No, it's not demeaning. To say that Kobe's paycheck could go towards AIDS research rather than towards a new car is not demaning, it's fact. Saying that your paycheck could go towards feeding a starving child rather than towards the internet bill is not demeaning, it's fact.
People always watched baseball, but the athletes were never paid as much as they are today. So why should they be paid so much now if they weren't in the past? Your stance is purely economical, how can you believe that a man who plays baseball for a living should make millions more than someone who does something beneficial to society. And I am not talking about Kobe's paycheck... Not only that but if my paycheck was taken away I would become a starving person, the internet bill just comes with that, it is demeaning to say that I should starve because an african kid already is. I am also not talking about completely taking away the paychecks of athletes.... Just lowering them.
[QUOTE="mfp16"][QUOTE="RuroKen4Life"][QUOTE="mfp16"] I couldn't disagree with you more... it was an affront in 1954 and it's still an affront in 2010, apparently you don't think it was "preachy" to put under god in the pledge but it is "preachy, and intolerant" when someone says it's not appropriate in a public school? You do realize that most people in this country are religious, what about the people who do believe in god... And the 50's were a very conservative time, so I can understand why it's there; not only that but I don't really give a crap that it's there, If it bothers you that much why don't you flex your first amendment rights and focus your energy on other, more important things... Not only that, but the kid didn't do what he did in a good way, it would be the equivalent of someone holding a bible and shoving Christianity down your throat. you say "what about the people who do believe in god"... I say "what about the people who don't". Why are they inherently more important to please than the latter? The people who don't should sit back, relax and try not to be hypocritical. I never said that the people who believe in god are more important to please, I mean that they are just as important and wield more power. Which is why the line is there in the first place.
So? Pretty much everything related to brain surgery or quality legal representation is also pretty expensive. The labor of the individuals that possess those types of highly trained and uncommon skillsets tend to be very desirable. Due to the fact that those few individuals can do amazing things that the great majority of us can't, they are able to sell their labor to those whom are willing to pay for it for a good sum of money. That doesn't mean they are overpaid.
[QUOTE="RuroKen4Life"] If not for the high prices of tickets, merchandise, etc. the players would not be paid as much. Yes people still buy the stuff but does that justify high prices and high wages?thegerg
Yes, it does justify them. If Joe's labor is deemed more valuable to the market than Jim's then Joe is justified in being reimbursed at a higher rate than Jim.
You are trivializing the average person, people need jobs and money, just not to excess...RuroKen4Life
Haha. I'm not trivializing anyone. Don't make accusations when you don't understand what you're talking about.
One would be right in saying that Kobe's paycheck could go to something more important, they would also be right in pointing out that your paycheck could go towards something more important. Those that earn more than you are not inherently less deserving of their money.
You aren't taking into account the ethics of paying athletes such large sums of money... I think it's wrong that they are paid hundreds of millions of dollars when people like doctors, soldiers and teachers are paid much less... Not only that but athletes were not always paid such huge sums of money, even while sports like baseball have been popular for a very long time, yet professional baseball players have always been skilled. And you know what, screw the market, athletes who make hundreds of millions of dollars do not deserve it compared to other people who make less money doing more noble things. Maybe you can prove it from an economic standpoint, but not from an ethical one... Yes, you are trivializing average people because to say that one's salary could go to a better cause is demeaning, for most people if they didn't have a paycheck they would have nothing. I am also not arguing for athletes to be paid nothing, it just does not need to be millions of dollars.
[QUOTE="mfp16"][QUOTE="RuroKen4Life"][QUOTE="mfp16"] How so? In my opinion it's not something that should have been added to the pledge in 1954 in the first place. It's about time atheists speak out... A lot of atheists are outspoken and douchy, which is why many people don't like them... The kid was just being intolerant and preachy, as much as the religions he hates.. I am an atheist as well and probably would have pimp slapped this kid. I couldn't disagree with you more... it was an affront in 1954 and it's still an affront in 2010, apparently you don't think it was "preachy" to put under god in the pledge but it is "preachy, and intolerant" when someone says it's not appropriate in a public school? You do realize that most people in this country are religious, what about the people who do believe in god... And the 50's were a very conservative time, so I can understand why it's there; not only that but I don't really give a crap that it's there, If it bothers you that much why don't you flex your first amendment rights and focus your energy on other, more important things... Not only that, but the kid didn't do what he did in a good way, it would be the equivalent of someone holding a bible and shoving Christianity down your throat.
they probably are overpaid but I can't think of a reasonable amount for them to be paid.. I do think they deserve a lot of money because they do live a hard lifestyle. a lot of time away from their families, keeping yourself in shape all year long, being criticized if you're in a slump, getting injuries, a lot of pressure, etc.
[QUOTE="RuroKen4Life"]The kid is a dumb ass who gives a bad name to atheists.mfp16
How so? In my opinion it's not something that should have been added to the pledge in 1954 in the first place. It's about time atheists speak out... A lot of atheists are outspoken and douchy, which is why many people don't like them... The kid was just being intolerant and preachy, as much as the religions he hates.. I am an atheist as well and probably would have pimp slapped this kid.
That money could be spent on much more important things than an athlete.
thegerg
When those specific dollars are coming out of the pockets of people that want that money to go towards seeing professional athletes play sports it doesn't matter. The money that your employer pays you could go towards much more important things as well.
That doesn't change the fact that pretty much everything related to sports (except the actual equipment) is pretty expensive. If not for the high prices of tickets, merchandise, etc. the players would not be paid as much. Yes people still buy the stuff but does that justify high prices and high wages? I don't think so... And with that last comment... You are trivializing the average person, people need jobs and money, just not to excess...
Log in to comment