Occupy this thread


log in

Advanced search

Message boards : Politics : Occupy this thread

Previous · 1 · 2
Author Message
Profile Es99Project donor
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 23 Aug 05
Posts: 9023
Credit: 255,803
RAC: 122
Canada
Message 1172772 - Posted: 21 Nov 2011, 19:31:43 UTC - in response to Message 1172215.

Oh dear, I bought some British Gas shares when they were privatised in 1986. Am I now dammed for all eternity .....

But are you a gas producer?
____________
Are you a feminist? Take the test

Profile Chris SProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 32064
Credit: 13,749,488
RAC: 26,389
United Kingdom
Message 1172786 - Posted: 21 Nov 2011, 20:34:02 UTC

But are you a gas producer?


Only after spinach and broccoli ....

Profile Sarge
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Aug 99
Posts: 9258
Credit: 1,500,615
RAC: 1,592
United States
Message 1173625 - Posted: 25 Nov 2011, 6:00:17 UTC - in response to Message 1172265.

This thread is epic. We now know which capitalists to exploit in order to pay our ways through life! :D

Terry


If you wish for an epic thread, post something serious.

Profile Sarge
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Aug 99
Posts: 9258
Credit: 1,500,615
RAC: 1,592
United States
Message 1173626 - Posted: 25 Nov 2011, 6:00:58 UTC - in response to Message 1172048.

But are you a capitalist? If so, what are you producing?


We used to have a scary one around here ....


Irrelevant.

Profile Sarge
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Aug 99
Posts: 9258
Credit: 1,500,615
RAC: 1,592
United States
Message 1173627 - Posted: 25 Nov 2011, 6:03:50 UTC - in response to Message 1172039.
Last modified: 25 Nov 2011, 6:06:13 UTC

In the "End" socialism "WILL" win!


i should not have spoken such.

to me,
Socialism means the "broadest consensus".
Capitalism means the "application of a force".

Capital, especially money, is an artificial human construct.
It's misuse has led to more grief than it is possible to convey.
It's proper use could accelerate Human evolution irreversibly, unimaginably.
A construct, an idea, could propel this planet's consciousness into forever.
At some point we'll leave even the idea of "Capital" behind.
We'll realize that "We" are our "Imagining". There will be no need for an intermediary, a capital, for our "Completion".

Till that day arrives,
find a sock,
put some money in it,
and remember where you hide "it".

If you can do that,
then the whole exercise becomes pointless,
you are no longer part of the problem.

The "Rest" will follow.


I do no think many of us would subscribe to your definitions of capitalism and socialism.
Knowing that communist thinkers placed a great deal of emphasis on how tool use allowed our minds to changed I wonder if any of them ever thought of capital ... money, as a tool which became not a means but an end?
Anyway, on what do you base your belief that "proper use could accelerate Human evolution irreversibly."

NickProject donor
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 11 Oct 11
Posts: 3977
Credit: 2,033,620
RAC: 971
United Kingdom
Message 1173727 - Posted: 25 Nov 2011, 21:48:35 UTC - in response to Message 1172019.

The definition of "Capitalism" doesn't have much to say about producing.
It does say more about ownership of inputs.

Ownership of inputs could just as easily be collective, and work just as well,
if people just weren't so selfish.

Capitalism only makes selfishness a defacto standard by way of the
synthetic attribution of "First Ownership" and it's derivative of "Property Rights".

In the "End" socialism "WILL" win!


Whilst people feel they should be rewarded for their efforts through work then
there will always be Capitalism present. Whilst people feel they should be
rewarded through other peoples efforts and work then there will always be
followers of Socialism. Presently this world can not survive on Socialism
alone for it would just not pay the rent for most of us presently residing
on this planet. Capitalism is an ability, Socialism is a belief and there is
no way a belief can conquer an ability if most people wish they had this ability
themselves. Communism tried it's hand at conquering this ability and in the
end it totally failed.

____________
The Kite Fliers

--------------------
Kite fliers: An imaginary club of solo members, those who don't yet
belong to a formal team so "fly their own kites" - as the saying goes.

Profile Sarge
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Aug 99
Posts: 9258
Credit: 1,500,615
RAC: 1,592
United States
Message 1173728 - Posted: 25 Nov 2011, 21:51:52 UTC - in response to Message 1173727.
Last modified: 25 Nov 2011, 21:52:07 UTC

The definition of "Capitalism" doesn't have much to say about producing.
It does say more about ownership of inputs.

Ownership of inputs could just as easily be collective, and work just as well,
if people just weren't so selfish.

Capitalism only makes selfishness a defacto standard by way of the
synthetic attribution of "First Ownership" and it's derivative of "Property Rights".

In the "End" socialism "WILL" win!


Whilst people feel they should be rewarded for their efforts through work then
there will always be Capitalism present. Whilst people feel they should be
rewarded through other peoples efforts and work then there will always be
followers of Socialism. Presently this world can not survive on Socialism
alone for it would just not pay the rent for most of us presently residing
on this planet. Capitalism is an ability, Socialism is a belief and there is
no way a belief can conquer an ability if most people wish they had this ability
themselves. Communism tried it's hand at conquering this ability and in the
end it totally failed.


Where do you get that Socialism is being rewarded for other people's successes?
From each ... to each ... .. I think your way is stretching it.

NickProject donor
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 11 Oct 11
Posts: 3977
Credit: 2,033,620
RAC: 971
United Kingdom
Message 1173730 - Posted: 25 Nov 2011, 22:03:29 UTC - in response to Message 1173728.

The definition of "Capitalism" doesn't have much to say about producing.
It does say more about ownership of inputs.

Ownership of inputs could just as easily be collective, and work just as well,
if people just weren't so selfish.

Capitalism only makes selfishness a defacto standard by way of the
synthetic attribution of "First Ownership" and it's derivative of "Property Rights".

In the "End" socialism "WILL" win!


Whilst people feel they should be rewarded for their efforts through work then
there will always be Capitalism present. Whilst people feel they should be
rewarded through other peoples efforts and work then there will always be
followers of Socialism. Presently this world can not survive on Socialism
alone for it would just not pay the rent for most of us presently residing
on this planet. Capitalism is an ability, Socialism is a belief and there is
no way a belief can conquer an ability if most people wish they had this ability
themselves. Communism tried it's hand at conquering this ability and in the
end it totally failed.


Where do you get that Socialism is being rewarded for other people's successes?
From each ... to each ... .. I think your way is stretching it.


Sarge, replace "successes" with my original word of "efforts"...you
naughty boy !...

____________
The Kite Fliers

--------------------
Kite fliers: An imaginary club of solo members, those who don't yet
belong to a formal team so "fly their own kites" - as the saying goes.

Profile Gary CharpentierProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 12722
Credit: 7,228,886
RAC: 16,194
United States
Message 1173780 - Posted: 26 Nov 2011, 1:45:03 UTC

We have pure socialist "economies" on this planet today. You likely can't name them however. Something to ponder.

I put the word economies in quotes because the pure versions of them are so brilliantly successful that they don't even register in the scheme of this world.

Where can you find them? Look in places like the Amazon for lost tribes, look to the South Pacific islands where the local language doesn't have a word for ownership or time. This is the best success of pure socialism on the planet.

Is this what you pine for? Subsistence?

The successful parts of the world are in part based on Capitalism.

Capitalism is the worst form of economy except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.

____________

Profile betregerProject donor
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 29 Jun 99
Posts: 2495
Credit: 5,220,273
RAC: 8,124
United States
Message 1173792 - Posted: 26 Nov 2011, 3:00:24 UTC - in response to Message 1173780.
Last modified: 26 Nov 2011, 3:01:46 UTC

Gary, true, but that does not mean we should not try to do better.
____________

Profile Sarge
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Aug 99
Posts: 9258
Credit: 1,500,615
RAC: 1,592
United States
Message 1173794 - Posted: 26 Nov 2011, 3:12:27 UTC - in response to Message 1173780.

We have pure socialist "economies" on this planet today. You likely can't name them however. Something to ponder.

I put the word economies in quotes because the pure versions of them are so brilliantly successful that they don't even register in the scheme of this world.

Where can you find them? Look in places like the Amazon for lost tribes, look to the South Pacific islands where the local language doesn't have a word for ownership or time. This is the best success of pure socialism on the planet.

Is this what you pine for? Subsistence?

The successful parts of the world are in part based on Capitalism.

Capitalism is the worst form of economy except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.


DO I personally pine for subsistence? No. I think you and I have some common ground. Did you not say something in the last few months about people being driven to buy things they do not really want or need all that much, and that one of the driving forces is external? Madison Avenue? How about capitalism based on legitimate wants and needs? Not produce whatever, convince people they need it, make them want it, etc. ... .

Profile Gary CharpentierProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 12722
Credit: 7,228,886
RAC: 16,194
United States
Message 1173802 - Posted: 26 Nov 2011, 5:04:54 UTC - in response to Message 1173792.

Gary, true, but that does not mean we should not try to do better.

Yes, we should try for better. We also should not repeat the mistakes of the past. There is a saying to remember; "A stupid decision made by millions of people, is still a stupid decision."

____________

BarryAZ
Send message
Joined: 1 Apr 01
Posts: 2580
Credit: 12,277,425
RAC: 3,887
United States
Message 1173815 - Posted: 26 Nov 2011, 6:21:10 UTC - in response to Message 1173802.

OK -- so socialism is a mistake, communism is a mistake, and as we've seen over the past decade, capitalism is a mistake. I'd also suggest in the 'mistakes not to be repeated' we can include fascism, autocracy, autaky (that's single nation economies), oligarchy. Any others to exclude -- trying to figure what that would leave us with as well.

[/quote]
Yes, we should try for better. We also should not repeat the mistakes of the past. There is a saying to remember; "A stupid decision made by millions of people, is still a stupid decision."
[/quote]

____________

Profile William Rothamel
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Oct 06
Posts: 2597
Credit: 1,180,227
RAC: 46
United States
Message 1173829 - Posted: 26 Nov 2011, 9:09:42 UTC - in response to Message 1173815.

What we need is a benevolent, all knowing dictator. They are few and far between, Lee Kwan You (Harry) in Singapore comes close as far as I know.

Profile Sarge
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Aug 99
Posts: 9258
Credit: 1,500,615
RAC: 1,592
United States
Message 1173830 - Posted: 26 Nov 2011, 9:11:21 UTC - in response to Message 1173829.

What we need is a benevolent, all knowing dictator. They are few and far between, Lee Kwan You (Harry) in Singapore comes close as far as I know.


I suspect you do not really mean that. Besudes ... "all knowing"? Dream on!

Profile Chris SProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 32064
Credit: 13,749,488
RAC: 26,389
United Kingdom
Message 1173848 - Posted: 26 Nov 2011, 11:17:57 UTC

Kibbutz's seem to work quite well, or did, but there has been radical re-structuring since the collapse of communism.

BarryAZ
Send message
Joined: 1 Apr 01
Posts: 2580
Credit: 12,277,425
RAC: 3,887
United States
Message 1173916 - Posted: 26 Nov 2011, 18:22:25 UTC - in response to Message 1173848.

Well, not really, and they vary in 'performance' a great deal from one to another. Further, that design definitely does not scale well.

Kibbutz's seem to work quite well, or did, but there has been radical re-structuring since the collapse of communism.

Profile Sarge
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Aug 99
Posts: 9258
Credit: 1,500,615
RAC: 1,592
United States
Message 1174082 - Posted: 27 Nov 2011, 16:36:11 UTC

Gary Charpentier said in the UK Riots thread:

The root cause of the riots is Madison Avenue. They have done such a fantastic job of creating demand that people who have no chance in life of owning an item now have a burning desire for it and feel entitled to have it. The result is criminality to obtain it to satisfy the false desire. Uh, is that like lying on a loan application to buy a house?

Perhaps governments should prevent children under the age of 15 from watching the telly or at least advertiser supported telly. Same for the net, a no ads net for kids. Kids are not mature enough to resist the scientifically crafted ads aimed at them. Ask any parent near XMAS about their children screaming gimme gimme gimme! They feel entitled, when they are not. They carry this through life. Life is: "The survival of the fit." Not "The survival of the entitled."

Sigh.

Previous · 1 · 2

Message boards : Politics : Occupy this thread

Copyright © 2014 University of California