he named his calculator!

anonymous asked:

What would be going through the guys mind as they raced to get to their s/o but as they look into their girls eyes know they would make it in time to save them, but She has a look of understanding (Haha sorry its so dark)

AH YES ANGST [I kinda went overboard with Donnie lmao]

LEONARDO

He can’t keep his cool.

He yells as his running and your tipping off the edge, he doesn’t stray and just yells your name over and over like somehow if he yelled it loud enough it would keep you from falling. But it didn’t.

You locked eyes with him just seconds before you fell and his heart skipped, his breathe staggered and through misty eyes he knew you forgave him.

But he didn’t want forgiveness, he wanted you. To be okay and to be here, with him. He tried force himself to believe you didn’t fall. That you were okay and that he got to you in time because he was the hero. The leader. He could do things others couldn’t. He tried, tried so hard to believe you were okay.

But you weren’t. And he had to come to terms with that.

The next few weeks, he didn’t say much, ate almost nothing and there was nothing in his mind but those forgiving eyes. But he’s still so sorry.

RAPHAEL

He’s desperate.

His chest is tight with panic and he feels as if he can’t breathe.

That car hurtling towards you wasn’t stopping. It wasn’t stopping and your foot was stuck and he was racing to save you, desperately hoping beyond all hope.

But God had other plans for you.

Raph locked eyes with you, and you smiled. Your eyes shined in a way that gave him calm, but he couldn’t feel it with all the blood rushing through his head. He knew what you were trying to do. You knew he wasn’t going to able to get to you in time and he saw that look and understood. But he didn’t accept it. He didn’t want to.

Just before the truck hit you, he felt a lightning bolt of panic. Anger. He felt everything.

That truck hitting you.

The screaming he was doing, but not hearing.

And that forgiving look you gave him, it was like fire in his head, one that for the life him he will never able to put out.

MIKEY

Hope. He has a world of hope in his head that he could catch you before you were consumed by the explosion.

His eyes never left yours, the rapid beeping like shock-waves that made him push himself farther, harder.

He felt his mouth moving, but he couldn’t here himself saying your name because his eyes, his mind was on you.

And the look you were giving him.

The look that said “it’s okay, I know.”

The look that told him “I forgive you, Mikey.”

The look that he will never forget, “I love you.”

He was blown back by the shock-waves, the ringing in his ears like the twitters of a songbird. He was distraught. Unbelieving. He made a promise to you, that he would never let harm come to you. But he broke it. He couldn’t feel the tears bubbling in his eyes and streaming down his face. He knew they were there.

As his concerned brothers surrounded him, all he could let leave from his bleeding lips was your name.

DONATELLO

He calculated. He mapped. He was sure of it. The tremors, the quakes before the storm. He knew what it all meant. He had everything thought out.

Except one factor. You.

He didn’t count on you wanting to surprise him with a new phone. He was counting on your appearance in the lair.

But you didn’t come and that’s what sent him rushing out into the open. He was always calculative. He always thought things through. But he could barely keep his balance, fraught with worry and panic as the ground cracked underneath him.

He spotted you. In the crowd of screaming people.

You were looking down and that’s what shook him to his core. You were going to fall.

He sprinted towards you, calling your name. Over and over, louder and louder still. He didn’t care if the screams turned to him. He didn’t care if the throngs of people saw him. All he knew was you.

And you looked to him. He was so far away but that look made him feel so very near. It was a look that understood. It was a look that tore his heart because he knew that you knew. He couldn’t save you.

You smiled at him and just before the ground crumbled beneath you, he lets out a strangled cry. He wasn’t counting on you dying today.

He wanted to grow old with you, he wanted nothing more than to see you come back to him. He always kicked around the bush and the small, black box in his pocket reminded him that the most precious person in his life is gone.

APRIL

Her throat was sore. Her hands felt numb and her shoulders shook.

Just please hold on. Please for one minute more, Y/N.

You clung to the edge of the bridge with everything you had and there were tears in her eyes as you slipped further.

She couldn’t lose you. There wasn’t a chance. If you died she would go running, and kick down Heaven’s gate just to bring you back.

But then you slipped.

And it was so surreal. It seemed like an hour pasted between your hands slipping away and your eyes meeting hers.

Her lips seemed numb as she mumbled frantically, denying for her tears that you were gone.

But you were. You were had slipped before she could get to you.

Before she could tell you. Before she could hold your hands and see you smile. Before she could says those three words that were left dying in the back of her throat.

And the worst part was that you forgave her. And she knew it. And she hated herself for it.

10

Kyu winning one for his Mafia team. [x]

[Malfeasance | Part I]

original request can be found here

takes place in the SF9 as: Mafia au; original post can be found here

heyo! so i had to break this into parts because wow i got carried away. anyways i hope yall liked the first part! stay tuned for part two!

+ admin L   

 “We’ve just received reports of a body discovered just a few meters south of Ilsan Bridge.  Officials from the Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency have yet to release an official statement but many are speculating. Could this be another victim of the recent serial murders in the city? Is the same group responsible for these heinous acts of violence? Stay with us as we…..”

    Inseong sighed, closing the tab with the live news footage of the newest body; the sixth one. There hadn’t been any new or useful information, not that news reporters were ever helpful to begin with. Tapping away at the keys, Inseong’s eyes darted back and forth between three different monitors (he really had five but two of them were strictly used for surveillance purposes), several windows popping up only to be discarded a second later.

    I need to find the connection he thought. Normally Inseong wouldn’t bother with such child’s play, but evidence had been found at the scene of the third murder. Evidence, that for some reason or another, had implications of the Red Dragons. Youngbin had been beyond furious when he’d found out and immediately ordered everyone to find the bastard that was trying to frame them. All of them, minus Chani, had left to meet up with various clients in hopes of gathering intel as well as reassuring them that the Red Dragons had nothing to do with it.

Keep reading

.

6

You can argue that it was ‘animal instinct’, but nothing will alter my opinion that Don was consciously aware of what he was doing. At least in part.

anonymous asked:

What is the transformation problem and is it an accurate problem or is it just a misreading of Marx?

In volume III of Capital, Marx posits the following formula for what he calls the “price of production,” which you can think of as the average price level for any given commodity:

price of production = (c + v)(1 + r)

where c is constant capital input, v is variable capital input, and r is the general rate of profit.

The “transformation problem” refers to Marx’s alleged “failure” to transform the inputs (c and v) into prices of production also in his calculations. When one carries out calculations for an economy (real or hypothetical) using the price of production formula, and one converts the inputs into prices of production also, one ends up having to abandon one of the following identities:

total value = total price

or

total surplus value = total profit.

In short, the “transformation problem” is the alleged problem that Marx did not transform production inputs into prices of production when he should have, and that if he had transformed inputs into prices of production in his calculations, he would have run into logical problems. Namely, he would not have been able to convincingly show a relationship between the labor expended in production and the aggregate price levels of an economy, and/or he would not have been able to show a relationship between surplus labor and profit.

This begs the question, why do the inputs in the price of production formula need to be “transformed” into prices of production as well? To posit that they do need to be “transformed” is a serious misunderstanding of the purpose of Marx’s discussion in Capital volume III. Marx is not concerned so much with explaining the precise magnitudes of prices, although in principle the formula can be used for that purpose. Marx is most fundamentally interested in explaining prices, i.e, what are prices? What function do they serve? How are they formed? Now, with that in mind, consider what usefulness the notion of a “price of production” would have if the theory was that the price of production for a given commodity was determined by the prices of production of the inputs. Marx uses the price of production formula as part of an effort to explain prices. If it was required to also convert inputs into prices of production when using the formula, we would be explaining prices in terms of prices. Saying “the price of the outputs is determined by the price of the inputs” is a completely tautological explanation of price and is not much different from the neoclassical garbage we see today. Basically, it would have been totally nonsensical for Marx to have converted inputs into prices of production in his calculations. Hence, Marx did not “fail” to convert the inputs.

So, what exactly does the price of production formula mean to explain, if not a connection between the price of the inputs and the price of the outputs? The price of production formula establishes a relationship between the value of the inputs (the value of the constant and variable capital utilized, not their prices!) and the prices of the outputs. Marx is trying to formalize a relationship between the average amount of labor actually expended in the production process, and the prices of commodities in a capitalist economy. Therefore, it is neither required nor logical to “transform” the inputs into prices of production when calculating the prices of production of outputs. The latter are determined by the value of the inputs.

To help solidify this argument, i think it’s also useful to discuss the reasons why so many theorists have mistakenly argued that Marx needed to and “failed” to convert inputs into prices of production:

1) Early critiques of Marx made by people who clearly hadn’t read Capital very closely (e.g. the infamous Böhm von Bawerk critique) were simply accepted without scrutiny, even by Marxists. Few Marxists interested in Marx’s price theory have bothered to even question whether the foundations of the “transformation problem” thesis are sound. There are an endless number of “solutions” to Marx’s “transformation problem,” but shockingly few have questioned whether the very notion that there is a “transformation problem” might be total nonsense.

2) The notion that it is required to convert inputs into prices of production when calculating the prices of outputs stems from a common misunderstanding that prices are simply “modified” values or “transformed” values. If prices are simply “modified” or “transformed” values, if values simply become prices when commodities are exchanged, it would indeed make no sense to leave the production inputs as simply values when carrying out the price of production formula. But in reality, prices are not values in any sense. There is a connection between price and value, but price and value maintain their distinction. As Marx would say, they are “distinctions within a unity.” Further, price is structured by value, and not the reverse. It is true that changes in prices can bring about changes in value to the extent that price changes beget shifts in the conditions of production. But ultimately, the labor expended in the production process is what determines the prices of commodities. Value doesn’t “become” price. Value structures price (”determines in the last instance,” to use the Althusserian jargon). The price of production formula expresses this relationship whereby value structures price, but this is missed by people who erroneously think that price is simply “transformed” value. Unfortunately, the error which holds that price is “transformed” value is exacerbated by Marx himself, who sometimes seems to confuse the two categories in his own writing. However, the notion of “transformation” of value into price is inconsistent with Marx’s overall procedure in Capital and also in the Grundrisse.

There are some other reasons people have bought into the notion of a “transformation problem” but the two above are i think the biggest ones.

TL;DR The price of production formula establishes a relationship between the value of inputs and the price of outputs, and value and price are distinct but related categories. Hence there is no “transformation problem,” as the very notion of a “transformation procedure” is nonsensical.

like,,,,,,,………i knew it was only a matter of time before harry would appear on covers and all that but i honestly wasnt prepared for it to look like THIS hes so so aware of everything he does and puts his name on im in awe thats my calculated son!!!!!