|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
posted April 17, 2009 10:38 PM |
|
|
Corribus:
The History of France in Five Minutes. 
Wolfsburg:
Quote:
Making your community IS a very effective way of "making yourself".
In that sense, I support that. But I'm against the community being an end in itself.
del_diablo:
Quote:
during the French revolution they had the foundations needed on place before they was done with overthrowing and exterminating king and queen. They was ready for it, they had the walls that you need for a solid castle.
Huh? Are we talking about the same French Revolution - the one where first they kind of pushed the king aside, then killed him, then decided to have a Reign of Terror for good measure, then got tired of that, and then had a military dictatorship - all in ten or so years?
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
DagothGares
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
No gods or kings
|
|
posted April 17, 2009 10:40 PM |
|
|
Then having another two revolutions for good measure... Where they became a republic, then a dictatorship again, then another republic.
____________
If you have any more questions, go to Dagoth Cares.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 17, 2009 10:47 PM |
|
|
No, it's more like this:
Monarchy
REVOLUTION
Murderous Dictatorship
Militaristic Dictatorship
GET CONQUERED
Monarchy
REVOLUTION
(liberal) Monarchy
REVOLUTION
Republic
Dictatorship
GET DEFEATED AND REVOLUTION
Republic
GET CONQUERED
Puppet Dictatorship
GET LIBERATED
Republic
OUR COLONIES HATE US!!!
Republic
And never had much economic freedom.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
del_diablo
Legendary Hero
Manifest
|
|
posted April 17, 2009 10:59 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Huh? Are we talking about the same French Revolution - the one where first they kind of pushed the king aside, then killed him, then decided to have a Reign of Terror for good measure, then got tired of that, and then had a military dictatorship - all in ten or so years?
I guess we are reading the same books, the thing is that they did not manage to skullbash themself or move away from their ideals during that time. The purpose of the first revolution and its foundation was: "No more bloody vampiric nobles". And they are still doing that quite well are they not?
Quote:
The Russian revolution had lenin, Marx and Trotsky... how was that NOT a good foundation?
Okay, yeah, Stalin ruined everyone's fun and maybe it WAS doomed to fail from the start, but Old Major was a good foundation.
They did well in the start, but their foundation was not solid enogh. A overclass of sorts still existsed, the goverment. They wanted to become communists, how is that not to fail on building the castle solid after those ideals.
Add on Stalin for safe measure and we got someting akin to litteral skullbash with giantic blunt hammers.
Quote:
And I have nothing more to say about your points, since my English isn't good enough to understand what you're saying.
I do admite i could used a little less messy way of writing 
____________
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 17, 2009 11:15 PM |
|
|
Quote:
the thing is that they did not manage to skullbash themself or move away from their ideals during that time
"Liberté, égalité, fraternité" somehow doesn't sound like "Killing a bunch of people, invading Russia, and reverting back to monarchy." But who's to say - I don't know French. Maybe that's how it translates.
Quote:
They did well in the start
"Immediately after the Russian revolution in 1917, the Bolsheviks under Lenin and Trotsky tried to carry out the Marxian program. They got planned chaos. Trotsky said they stared into the "abyss." Chastened by that experience, Lenin enacted the New Economic Policy, which was a reintroduction of money and markets. No Soviet leader ever tried to abolish the market again." http://www.isil.org/resources/lit/to-create-order.html
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
del_diablo
Legendary Hero
Manifest
|
|
posted April 17, 2009 11:29 PM |
|
|
Quote:
"Liberté, égalité, fraternité" somehow doesn't sound like "Killing a bunch of people, invading Russia, and reverting back to monarchy." But who's to say - I don't know French. Maybe that's how it translates.
Liberty, Equality and Brootherhood.
And your pulling a sort of strawman again, Naponeon managed to get in charge however the thing is that he did not walk over those words. He walked with them. There is a bloody difference. Yes he crowned himself Emperor aka King, but he did not exactly reintroduce monarchy. He just become a sort of "elected for however long that is".
Quote:
"Immediately after the Russian revolution in 1917, the Bolsheviks under Lenin and Trotsky tried to carry out the Marxian program. They got planned chaos. Trotsky said they stared into the "abyss." Chastened by that experience, Lenin enacted the New Economic Policy, which was a reintroduction of money and markets. No Soviet leader ever tried to abolish the market again." http://www.isil.org/resources/lit/to-create-order.html
Touche!
You don't just remove the marked, they did not understand that you just don't change anything over a night. Or atleast not the entire infrastructure, had they used 5 years on moving over to it then it COULD have worked.
____________
|
|
DagothGares
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
No gods or kings
|
|
posted April 17, 2009 11:33 PM |
|
|
Well, you know the 'code Napoléon' sparked many revolutions throughout Europe, but we're going off-topic. Since it's easierto discuss facts, we just dropped the socialism discussion.
____________
If you have any more questions, go to Dagoth Cares.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 17, 2009 11:53 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Yes he crowned himself Emperor aka King, but he did not exactly reintroduce monarchy.
He became a dictator, called himself "Emperor", and intended for his son to succeed him.
Quote:
Or atleast not the entire infrastructure, had they used 5 years on moving over to it then it COULD have worked.
Britain tried that under Atlee. It proved to be a failure.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 18, 2009 08:16 AM |
|
|
Quote:
The pay-according-to-success thing is great.
China however has billions of people and is a communist country. They can afford experiments with health care.
Do you want to spend the first half of your life studying your butt off and then doing a job in which people's lives depend on your success, with the knowledge that a secretary which is good at typing gets paid more than you do?
Cause I sure as hell don't. I'd have a distinct feeling that someone's making an idiot out of me.
What you proposed isn't equality but imbecility.
And talent isn't an incentive, but a requirement for working with people's lives. Money isn't there to drag people to do that job, but to reward those who are talented, skilled and brave enough to do so.
Wrong in all respects. It wasn't communist China but ancient China. Not all docs are surgeons, and lots of people are playing with lifes in their jobs, not hezzing surgeon payment. Air Traffic controllers have much more lifes to handle, for example, but earn less on average.
And if talent is a "requirement" for working with people's lives I wonder when and by whom that es tested.
In any case I wonder what job you have and how satisfied you are IN your job.
And for the talented, money isn't a reward, but an acknowledgement. Rewards look different.
As a sidenote, I didn't know that doctors have such a short life expectancy.
Quote:
Bingo. It's just amusing that JJ, who wouldn't agree with you if you told him the color of an orange, would call someone stubborn.
The trouble with you is that your oranges are all too often lemons.
|
|
baklava
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Mostly harmless
|
|
posted April 18, 2009 10:32 AM |
|
|
What's the point of typing "wrong" at the start of all your posts anyway
Quote:
Air Traffic controllers have much more lifes to handle, for example, but earn less on average.
Quote:
And if talent is a "requirement" for working with people's lives I wonder when and by whom that es tested.
Well then perhaps we need a different kind of change?
Then again, the job of Air Traffic controllers is somewhat easier than a surgeon's. But how much someone is paid is quite a hole in the system of today - football players have infinitely more money than an Air Traffic controller could ever dream of, for example. But we need to improve that in more rational aspects than what you proposed.
Depending on how your mind functions, you can see money as a reward and the respect of your colleagues as acknowledgment, or you can see money as acknowledgment and the respect of your colleagues as a reward. Either way it doesn't really make any difference, especially for the purpose of this conversation; acknowledgment is also a reward and rewards can be viewed as an acknowledgment. I understand your need to disagree with every sentence said but this is getting ridiculous.
I don't know how studies of medicine work in the United States, but here you need to spend quite a lot of time before you are allowed to be a surgeon. Perhaps that's a kind of a test for working with lives?
____________
"Let me tell you what the blues
is. When you ain't got no
money,
you got the blues."
Howlin Wolf
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 18, 2009 12:33 PM |
|
|
First, I don't disagree with everything said. SOME people in this thread have made contributions I completely agree with (you won't have any difficulties to find out who).
But ultimately you think too much in MONEY dimensions.
Ask yourself a simple question: what do you value more in your life: material things or persons and what you can do with them.
In other words, what's better: the hightech-eqipped room in which you live alone, or the primitive chamber with a big table, a couple of frinds, a beer, and a game of cards, leisure or whatever.
We haven't INVENTED fun, and money isn't what life is all about. Money and material things make life EASIER, but not HAPPIER.
That's why everything has to be in the balance and the balance has been tilting too the money side of the equation.
Now, work. I don't know what you work, if you work, and how old you are, but if I could pick between a job paying, like, OKBUTNOTGREAT that I would simply like, feel well in and find SATISFACTION in doing, and another one paying, like, GREATPLUSABIT that I would hate, so not like and don't find satisfaction in, I would immediately and without any kind of hesitation pick the one I LIKE - and not only me.
The reason is simple - you need one HELL of a lot of money to make up for the time you waste with working in a job you just find nothing good in EXCEPT the money. In the longer run it will simply ruin your life.
Of course mindset plays a role. If your job is sitting behind a cash register in a grocery store or something like that, it's more difficult than being in a creative job - but haveing nice colleagues and maybe even friends among them will help.
In any case, surgeons and doctors make LOTS of mistakes - and I don't mean failures. I mean just MISTAKES, errors of judgement, wrong diagnoses, wrong treatments, wrong cuts, lapses in concentration, whatever. Surely the reason for that is not that everyone who is in the job is talented as well.
In fact, if you look deeper into the scene, you'll find that an awful lot of people - in whatever job - are bungling, sad, but true.
True is also, that a lot more is necessary to change things for the better: different and more efficient schooling; a check on power division between smaller and bigger political entities; a ccheck on the mechanisms of hihj level decision making; a limit on private wealth; a limit on financing the overtaking of corps with credit money and so on and so endlesly forth.
Don't think for a moment I'd dream about turning back the clock or something. But it's highest time to put an end to the inevitability of SOME people eating the meat, while the rest can pick th bones - and clean out the waste for their effort.
|
|
baklava
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Mostly harmless
|
|
posted April 18, 2009 02:06 PM |
|
|
I understand that money is a material good and that spiritual and emotional needs are far more important. Trust me, I fully know that.
But, as much as I would love that, I realized in time that you can't lead a planet at this stage of evolution based on emotions and conscience of that sort. If people were that way, we wouldn't need a new bloody system, we could be living happily in anarchy.
This way, we need to do the best we can with what we've got. Without risking that everything collapses.
____________
"Let me tell you what the blues
is. When you ain't got no
money,
you got the blues."
Howlin Wolf
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 18, 2009 02:23 PM |
|
|
Quote:
But, as much as I would love that, I realized in time that you can't lead a planet at this stage of evolution based on emotions and conscience of that sort. If people were that way, we wouldn't need a new bloody system, we could be living happily in anarchy.
This way, we need to do the best we can with what we've got. Without risking that everything collapses.
Don't you think that this is actually saying nothing at all? I mean, what do you mean with "you can't lead a planet based on..." IS this planet "led" currently? If so, by whom or what and based on what? Greed? Wastefulness? Carelessness?
And what do you mean with "Without risking that everything collapses"? Ask your parents or grandparents or simply look into a history book: that's exactly the point - ALL THE TIME people are risking that everything collapses - but mostly for their OWN good, that's what I mean with everyone else always have to take out the garbage.
We live quite comfortably currently in the first world, but even a greater inflation will be enough to destroy a significant part of old age provisions, inurance payments and so on, in short, it will risk a collapse. Not to mention floods, melted pole caps , starving, AIDS and others, you name it. Makes no sense to put the head ino the sand.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 18, 2009 04:03 PM |
|
|
JJ:
Quote:
Now, work. I don't know what you work, if you work, and how old you are, but if I could pick between a job paying, like, OKBUTNOTGREAT that I would simply like, feel well in and find SATISFACTION in doing, and another one paying, like, GREATPLUSABIT that I would hate, so not like and don't find satisfaction in, I would immediately and without any kind of hesitation pick the one I LIKE - and not only me.
Congratulations! You've discovered trade-offs!
Bak:
Quote:
I understand that money is a material good and that spiritual and emotional needs are far more important.
One does not exclude the other.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
Wolfsburg
Promising
Known Hero
... the Vampire Doc
|
|
posted April 18, 2009 05:40 PM |
|
|
I dont actually believe giving people equal loans for all trades would do us good at the end. Its an interesting idea at first glance but its one that excludes individuality, and the fact that some jobs are more demmanding than others. Leading to inevitable questioning and downfall.
But according to Aristotle, the reason to have an ethical society IS so people are happy. And the more simplistic that may sound, I still fail to see a more noble purpose in life, than common happiness.
Back to track, you just CANNOT be happy if you are being exploited, and not getting payed nearly enough to envisionize happiness. Thats where the state fills its role. Your taxes as a multimillionaire soccer player should be high enough to ensure the flight controllers their rightful priviledges (education, health-care, transportation. culture...). With those rights ensured one is able to work happily and freely, within something they like, even knowing they will never be as well-payed as a neurosurgeon.
(Which in the end doesn't matter, for they have everything they need, making extra mountains of money a little-appealing proposition per se).
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 18, 2009 05:48 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Back to track, you just CANNOT be happy if you are being exploited
Except for actual slavery, there is no such thing as exploitation.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
tyraxor
Adventuring Hero
Ruler of the burning Desert
|
|
posted April 18, 2009 06:10 PM |
|
|
@Fathers first post in this trhead.
I do not try to defend capitalism. I think the idea of communism has its good sides. I don't like the capitalistic thougt that earning money is the most important in your life. Also I don't like the hedonism that occured in many capitalistic countries, and in some countries, the market and economies are much too free (trough this farmers are forced to sell their milk beneath a good price and are their farms not rendable anymore. And of course capitalism caused two worldwide financial crisis.
But the trhead was about socialism and communism and the question was:follow or don't follow?
____________
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 18, 2009 06:15 PM |
|
|
Quote:
I don't like the capitalistic thougt that earning money is the most important in your life.
How is that a capitalist thought?
Quote:
farmers are forced to sell their milk beneath a good price
Price floors are a bad, bad, bad idea. Do you like shortages? I thought not.
Quote:
of course capitalism caused two worldwide financial crisis.
Of course it did. I mean, it could probably have been avoided if we had an Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, Office of Thrift Supervision, Office of Financial Institutions, Office of International Trade, Office of Banking and Securities, Office of Trade Finance, Office of International Monetary Policy, Office of Financial Stability, Import-Export Bank, Exchange Stabilization Fund, Working Group on Financial Markets, Plunge Protection Team, Federal Trade Commission (FTC), National Credit Union Administration (NCUA), Securities Investor Protection Corporation (SIPC), Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FFIEC), Federal Housing Finance Board (FHFB), United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), and an Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO).
If we had just passed the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, Revenue Act of 1913, Securities Act of 1933, Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Banking Act of 1935, Trust Indenture Act of 1939, Investment Company Act of 1940, Investment Advisors Act of 1940, Employment Act of 1946, Federal Reserve-Treasury Department Accord of 1951, Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, 1970, Commodity Exchange Act of 1970, Securities Investor Protection Act of 1970, Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, Home Mortgage Disclosure Act of 1975, Federal Reserve Reform Act of 1977, Financial Institutions Regulatory and Interest Rate Control Act of 1978, International Banking Act of 1978, Full Employment and Balanced Growth Act of 1978, Monetary Control Act of 1980, Garn-St. Germain Depository Institutions Act of 1982, Plaza Accord of 1985, Lourve Accord of 1987, Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988, Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery and Enforcement Act of 1989, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991, Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act of 1992, National Securities Markets Improvement Act of 1996, Gramm Leach Bliley Act of 1999, Regulation Fair Disclosure Rule of 2000, Uniform Securities Act of 1956, 1985, 1988 and 2002, Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002, Regulation National Market System Rule of 2005, and the Community Re-Investment Act of 1994, we could have avoided all of this.
Oh, wait.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
del_diablo
Legendary Hero
Manifest
|
|
posted April 18, 2009 07:49 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
I don't like the capitalistic thougt that earning money is the most important in your life.
How is that a capitalist thought?
Actually, the only reason its capitialistic its because its the way of capitalistic thinking.
Quote:
Quote:
farmers are forced to sell their milk beneath a good price
Price floors are a bad, bad, bad idea. Do you like shortages? I thought not.
Strawman + claiming air.
If the price goes to low the farmers will go bankrupt, and the spiral leads to less food. The other alternativ is to regulate in the amount produce in 2 decades, and they still earn money.
Quote:
Quote:
Back to track, you just CANNOT be happy if you are being exploited
Except for actual slavery, there is no such thing as exploitation.
Its a shame that slavery actually exists, still. Not as in actuall slavery, but more on the lines of bankers and debts.
Quote:
of course capitalism caused two worldwide financial crisis.
Of course it did. I mean, it could probably have been avoided if we had an Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, Office of Thrift Supervision, Office of Financial Institutions, Office of International Trade, Office of Banking and Securities, Office of Trade Finance, Office of International Monetary Policy, Office of Financial Stability, Import-Export Bank, Exchange Stabilization Fund, Working Group on Financial Markets, Plunge Protection Team, Federal Trade Commission (FTC), National Credit Union Administration (NCUA), Securities Investor Protection Corporation (SIPC), Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FFIEC), Federal Housing Finance Board (FHFB), United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), and an Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO).
If we had just passed the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, Revenue Act of 1913, Securities Act of 1933, Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Banking Act of 1935, Trust Indenture Act of 1939, Investment Company Act of 1940, Investment Advisors Act of 1940, Employment Act of 1946, Federal Reserve-Treasury Department Accord of 1951, Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, 1970, Commodity Exchange Act of 1970, Securities Investor Protection Act of 1970, Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, Home Mortgage Disclosure Act of 1975, Federal Reserve Reform Act of 1977, Financial Institutions Regulatory and Interest Rate Control Act of 1978, International Banking Act of 1978, Full Employment and Balanced Growth Act of 1978, Monetary Control Act of 1980, Garn-St. Germain Depository Institutions Act of 1982, Plaza Accord of 1985, Lourve Accord of 1987, Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988, Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery and Enforcement Act of 1989, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991, Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act of 1992, National Securities Markets Improvement Act of 1996, Gramm Leach Bliley Act of 1999, Regulation Fair Disclosure Rule of 2000, Uniform Securities Act of 1956, 1985, 1988 and 2002, Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002, Regulation National Market System Rule of 2005, and the Community Re-Investment Act of 1994, we could have avoided all of this.
Oh, wait.
Indeed, they only delayed what was coming. Most people who read the numbers flow knew this was coming ages ago.
____________
|
|
tyraxor
Adventuring Hero
Ruler of the burning Desert
|
|
posted April 18, 2009 07:52 PM |
|
|
Is that last part intented to confuse me?
Did you serious typed it all? wow
But, the capitalistic thougt. I don't know if the situation in America is the same as in the Netherlands, but in the Netherlands the people who actually caused this crisis don't even feel the consequences. I mean, thousands of investors are lost all, of a great part, of their money. The bankers who had to watch this money and had to keep it save, are fired but they receive a bonus of one million dollar or even more. This practics are incomprehensible. Thats what I ment with the capitalistic thougt, that making money is become too important.
And about price floors, I think its fair that farmers receive an amount where they can live on. The brokering (if thats the right word) is making big money, They buy the milk for a low price. If the farmers want to have more? the buyers just go to a company that is prepared to sell their milk for the low price. Than the brokering sells the milk to supermarkets for a much bigger price.
And I don't know what you mean with shortages actually?
____________
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
