|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
posted April 17, 2009 01:50 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Well the government is supposed to be a collective manifestation of the people's opinion.
Depends on the type of government. Many Americans think that's the role of the US government, but it's not. The Founders specifically set this government up to protect people from the opinions of the majority, not to enforce them.
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
mamgaeater
Legendary Hero
Shroud, Flying, Trample, Haste
|
|
posted April 17, 2009 02:02 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
Well the government is supposed to be a collective manifestation of the people's opinion.
Depends on the type of government. Many Americans think that's the role of the US government, but it's not. The Founders specifically set this government up to protect people from the opinions of the majority, not to enforce them.
Which is the opinion that the government ought to protect us.
Opinion is a vague enough word to stretch and cover vast swathes.
But then again, people are always enforcing their values upon others.
They simply desire that they are protected from others opinions.
Its a paradox.
____________
Protection From Everything.
dota
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted April 17, 2009 02:26 AM |
|
|
Quote:
No, unnatural. Every observable quantity in nature is subject to statistical distribution. Quantities describing people are no different.
Expecting everyone to be the same makes about as much scientific and mathematical sense as expecting to get heads every time you flip a coin.
While I do not particularly embrace communism, even so, that's not what communism does. It doesn't expect ANYONE to be the same, if that were so, it wouldn't even need itself or the government or any kind of system!
You don't need to have a system to control the "whiteness" of a society full of white sheep. You probably will need if you are more realistic and notice there are black sheep as well. So communism indeed does not assume ANYONE is equal, that's why it's there, to 'correct' that, so to speak 
For example, it could be naive to think that we will ever have 100% peace. Though, this doesn't make you naive if you FIGHT for that cause than letting it the way it is.
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 17, 2009 03:16 AM |
|
|
I think what Corribus meant is that communism expects everyone to become the same - and that it would be a good thing.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
Wolfsburg
Promising
Known Hero
... the Vampire Doc
|
|
posted April 17, 2009 03:50 AM |
|
|
I dont really think equality is against human nature. There are people everywhere embracing althruist causes in order to deliver the unfortunate more life quality, in the very search for equalitarian life standards.
The problem is the few others who actually appreciate things as they are, and actively boycott a more equalitarian social structure.
Claiming that seeking for equality is not part of the inner nature of human beings, and that complete peace is naive, shows not only a grosse underestimation of the human spirit, but an omissive attitude that helps nothing in our evolution as thinking creatures.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 17, 2009 04:02 AM |
|
|
|
Wolfsburg
Promising
Known Hero
... the Vampire Doc
|
|
posted April 17, 2009 04:34 AM |
|
|
I mean exactly what you mean by equality. Not more not less.
And dont get me wrong, I dont think complete equality is managable or even desired. I certainly dont see a mass of "equal individuals" as a solution in first place. That everybody should be called pinkwitz and get payed 50 bucks independent of what they do.
But the active search for approximate, more equalitarian life standards is the only way for peace. The idea of "making your community" instead of "making yourself". To think of common interest before your own. Thats also socialism.
In my humble opinion, the very search for equality is far more noble and determining, than the impositon of equality.
And capitalism (as we know it) has been doing nothing to encourage it.
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted April 17, 2009 04:37 AM |
|
Edited by Corribus at 04:53, 17 Apr 2009.
|
Quote:
I dont really think equality is against human nature.
First, I didn't say human nature. I said natural. And a more precise term I guess would be... hmmm, well since I'm using a thermodynamic model I guess I'd say "spontaneous". Meaning, that the system (in this case humanity) will naturally tend towards that end given enough time and initial input energy.
So, if complete equality is natural, then perhaps you'd care to explain why, no matter how much energy you put into the system, equilibrium lies so far towards inequality. It's clearly not a thermodynamically favorable process. Note that this isn't a value judgement at all.
By the way, I'm not the first person by any means who have seen similarities between economics and thermodynamics (or sociology and thermodynamics). There are several established thermoeconomic models out there.
EDIT: Incidentally, the thermodynamic term that (at least in my interpretation) causes the drive towards equality to be nonspontaneous is entropy. Which, if you really care, I can elaborate on if you want.
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 17, 2009 04:42 AM |
|
|
Quote:
The idea of "making your community" instead of "making yourself". To think of common interest before your own. Thats also socialism.
Well, if that is socialism, then I am proud to call socialism my enemy.
Why is economic equality even desirable? All individuals should be free to make themselves as well-off as possible, as long as they don't initiate aggression against others.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
Wolfsburg
Promising
Known Hero
... the Vampire Doc
|
|
posted April 17, 2009 04:49 AM |
|
|
Hiya Corribus, thanks for the reply.
But I respectfully disagree with the thermodinamical comparison. Although economic models can be often accurately compared to physical laws, thermodinamics tells nothing of our unique capacity of rational thinking, just as much as ant colonies or grasshopper swarms can't accurately represent the human behavior.
With a massive telencephalus, we are unpredictable, engenious, capable of abstract thinking, thus amazing at improvising and coming up new solutions.
We CAN come up with a much more equalitarian system and be perfectly happy with it.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 17, 2009 04:52 AM |
|
|
Quote:
We CAN come up with a much more equalitarian system and be perfectly happy with it.
Oh? Do tell how we would do this without coercion and while maintaining economic calculation.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted April 17, 2009 04:57 AM |
|
|
Quote:
With a massive telencephalus, we are unpredictable, engenious, capable of abstract thinking, thus amazing at improvising and coming up new solutions.
Complexity does not mean incapable of being modeled using scientific laws. Human thoughts and emotions are governed by the same physical laws as every other chemical system out there.
Quote:
We CAN come up with a much more equalitarian system and be perfectly happy with it.
Yes, in the short term, but over time all things tend toward inequality and, eventually, anarchy. And the rate of decay is proportional to the distance from equilibrium.
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
del_diablo
Legendary Hero
Manifest
|
|
posted April 17, 2009 10:26 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Gootch:Quote:
Start with Denmark.
Denmark has one of the freest economies in the world. Sorry, try again.
Actually it got ya mvass.
Denmark is quite left winged, and leftwinged is towards socialisme and communisme. Your idea of "capitalisme equals free economie" is a vile diseased beast, and that is what think. Eqonomic freedom is quite subjective, and just because they are on the far left does not mean they have left behind money yet. Taxes and that being used for public health services along with other things that benefits the people, and thus bigger steps towards equality is what it is.
My idea of socialisme in pracis involves getting to the stage where money is no more, and thats quite a bit up the road.
Quote:
Quote:
We CAN come up with a much more equalitarian system and be perfectly happy with it.
Yes, in the short term, but over time all things tend toward inequality and, eventually, anarchy. And the rate of decay is proportional to the distance from equilibrium.
But why focus on the negative that may never happen when we can focus on someting posetiv? Its not like you say: "That moon-rocket is going to blow ages before it reaches space", yet the actuall outcome is that it reached space and maybe the moon?
____________
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 17, 2009 10:28 AM |
|
|
You people simply have a wrong understanding of what this "equality" actually means. It does NOT mean that everyone is the same.
Try and think about the system we currently live in and try to pinpoint what is wrong. Wrong is that lots of people are "in the wrong job", doing it for the money only. Wrong is, that although there are people that are bad in their job still get a lot of money just because the job pays much.
So how would a system have to look where the highest priority would be to make sure as many people as possible find the "right" job (inevitably the job they excel in andlike doing)? Let's put aside the educational part - school would have to be quite different, but school should be different anyway and is not the issue here.
Obviously, what a job pays should play no role, ultimately, in the decision what profession to learn, however, the demand of society for a job does.
So the goal is to have all jobs pay the same "base" rate (equality), and allow raises and deductions or "bonus" payments/wages only on the basis of how good someone does their job. Which would ultimately mean, that a doctor would get the same BASE wage than a plumber (which would be the same money he gets while making the additional and necessary years of study and education for the job) - plus of course the bonus for the quality (success) of their work.
The DEMAND would have to be decided sooner, at the moment of education.
This is of course VERY sketchy, but I'm not about to paint a full picture, it should be clear what is meant.
You know, one reason why money is so important in capitalism is that so many people are unhappy with their work. For the people who ARE really happy with their work, money is not nearly as important.
As a sidenote - the "jobs" you don't need any education for - usually the things that are done by the lowest of the lowly - those are the things that can OBVIOUSLY be done by everyone. Now, there is or has been something like "the draft" where people learn fighting wars. What we need instead is a "draft" on everyone for a year of social services - which includes cleaning the waste. Everyone produces waste, so everyone should clean it, for a time at least.
And that is socialism. You share the good ones and the bad ones.
|
|
Minion
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted April 17, 2009 11:49 AM |
|
|
Finland is one very socialistic country. What mvass understands as socialism is some age old propaganda from the Soviet era, and nothing more. There is a host of socialistic models out there, we are social-democrat.
Finns are among the world's best educated, it wouldn't occur to them that they are going to receive social services for free. But since they also live in a democracy, they are free to insist that all citizens have the basic requisites of life. The capitalist myth is that if you must share your wealth with your fellow citizens, you will just take your toys and go home. No innovation. No invention. Stagnation, stagnation, stagnation.
The innovative economy is competitive and makes it possible to finance the welfare state, which is not just a cost, but a sustainable basis for the economy, producing new innovators with social protection. Our economy was ranked most competitive in the world by World Economic Forum ranking. Sure we have high taxes, and the taxation is heaviest on the richest. I don't think it is a bad thing, though. Here are some short facts from an article :
* Ranked #1 for press freedom by Reporters Without Borders
* Ranked #2 (after Sweden) in investment in research and development (R&D)
* Free university education!!!
* Subsidized day care
* Most competitive economy in the world by World Economic Forum ranking
* Among the world's most egalitarian societies
Now before you launch your attack, I must add that our model won't fit everyone. For hosts of reasons. But it does happen to work awfully well here. We have a wealthy, caring and egalitarian society. It is hard to take those claims that "socialism is bad, mmkay"-arguments seriously ;P (however, there are awfully lot wrong here as well, I could go on for days about it)
____________
"These friends probably started using condoms after having produced the most optimum amount of offsprings. Kudos to them for showing at least some restraint" - Tsar-ivor
|
|
baklava
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Mostly harmless
|
|
posted April 17, 2009 12:24 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Let's talk about good socialism please. You know, the kind that is the envy of Western Europe.
Start with Denmark.
I thought Denmark's a constitutional monarchy or something. 
Never mind, there's always France.
____________
"Let me tell you what the blues
is. When you ain't got no
money,
you got the blues."
Howlin Wolf
|
|
del_diablo
Legendary Hero
Manifest
|
|
posted April 17, 2009 12:39 PM |
|
|
Quote:
I thought Denmark's a constitutional monarchy or something.
What does goverment form have to do with their place in the left-right winged scale?
____________
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 17, 2009 02:23 PM |
|
|
del_diablo:
Quote:
My idea of socialisme in pracis involves getting to the stage where money is no more, and thats quite a bit up the road.
You have no idea how unrealistic that idea is.
Quote:
But why focus on the negative that may never happen when we can focus on someting posetiv?
"Stalin made Russia a powerful industrial nation! Why are you focusing on the fact that he killed millions of people?"
JJ:
There are so many flaws in that idea, it's a wonder that anyone could ever advocate it.
Quote:
Wrong is, that although there are people that are bad in their job still get a lot of money just because the job pays much.
You know, all jobs have some unpleasant aspects. People need to get paid to do all that.
Quote:
Which would ultimately mean, that a doctor would get the same BASE wage than a plumber (which would be the same money he gets while making the additional and necessary years of study and education for the job) - plus of course the bonus for the quality (success) of their work.
I'm sorry, this is just utter nonsense. A doctor is much more productive than a plumber, so should get paid more.
Quote:
What we need instead is a "draft" on everyone for a year of social services - which includes cleaning the waste.
Hi, dictator.
Minion:
Finland's taxes may be high, but its regulations are low, and it has virtually no tariffs - so that more than makes up for it.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
baklava
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Mostly harmless
|
|
posted April 17, 2009 03:01 PM |
|
|
@Jolly
Regardless of what MVass said of a doctor being more productive (since that just leads to another zillion of debates), why would anyone possibly want to spend half their life in complex studies of medicine when they can get a one-month crash course in typing and work as a secretary, without being responsible for people's lives, for the same wage? (or a larger one if they're good at typing )
@Diablo
Quote:
What does goverment form have to do with their place in the left-right winged scale?
Uhm. Pretty much?
A fascist government, for example, can't be expected to lean too much to the Left, as far as I know.
Then again, who knows. Sometimes, the difference between a parliamentary monarchy and social democracy can indeed be just theoretical.
And a society without money, no matter how much I would love that, can't really work at this stage of evolution. I thought a lot about that back when I was trying to think up a way to make anarchy implementable, and I just couldn't find a rational solution.
What would be the alternative? Exchange of goods? That worked about 3000 years before Christ, but I'm not sure it would be too great now.
In some anarcho-communes in Spain between world wars, money was replaced with some "coupons" or something... That can perhaps be made to work but we can as well keep the money then, instead of replacing it with something which functions the same just with another name.
And basically that's it. Or at least I couldn't think of any other option.
____________
"Let me tell you what the blues
is. When you ain't got no
money,
you got the blues."
Howlin Wolf
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted April 17, 2009 03:13 PM |
|
|
@del diablo
Quote:
But why focus on the negative that may never happen when we can focus on someting posetiv? Its not like you say: "That moon-rocket is going to blow ages before it reaches space", yet the actuall outcome is that it reached space and maybe the moon?
I *said* that I'm not making a value judgement. I'm just telling you how it is. Collapse is inevitable.
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
