Population growth ideals, wealth distribution

[Guest]

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Login with username, password and session length

[3rdCondor]

How about we just become cannibals and reduce the population growth!

[Groundfire]

If at the very root of everything, equality between all humans is what we want then the only philosophical doctrines that must be embraced are property rights and a non-aggression principle. Ill tell you why.

A respect for all property rights is a respect for the body and all it's associative parts. The body is the essence of property. If you do not own yourself, then you own nothing.

The non-aggression principle consists of the moral rule to not aggress against your neighbor, violating the property of his body or his possessions.

All the transgressions of the past stem from not adhering to these two philosophical doctrines. Break any one of the two and its possible to break both and then its a slippery slope to atrocities. For individuals, its murder 1. When its a government, its genocide.

In order for society to be equal, we cannot rely on the state, for the state fundamentally flawed. The state violates both principles. This is why communism fails. You cannot have a mechanism of equality such as the state that robs from one to give to another; its a fallacy. It is reasonable to say that those who resist enough are shot dead or are thrown in a dungeon and if that is the extent of compliance, then how can you really say the system works? That is not equal, but such is every state.

In order to make an equal society, we must change ourselves first. Its a generational change. You cannot do it by taking the gun of power and pointing at the people you don't like, which is all the state is in the first place.

[Demon767]

Kids nowadays, thinking some university degree will magically teach them how to run a business lulz.

Without taking into the account the necessary funds to even take off.




Tank's method, from what few truths I could gather from his many (and usually good) cynic jokes, are among the best.

You must think you're a genius to be the only one to have ever thought of that

[Smokaz]

A father figure is can be hard to come by for some persons, it's a excellent foundation for popularity from men of less age than the object of adoration.

As for business methods built around the idea of hard work, awesome I suppose if everyone works equally hard the same amount of resources will be made available to them through a Law of Moral Action and Effect.

[Sachaztan]

1. You do realise your link corroborates exactly what I said? People are objectively better off and they realise it - but their emotional well being doesn't actually increase.

2. What the video talks about is, specifically - cognitive process motivation. As unfortunate as it may be - menial labour has been and will probably always be a rather major part of our lives - and if the people doing hard, if not sophisticated work are unmotivated to actually do their jobs well - everyone will feel the burden at the end of the day. Money may not be the universal motivator (I never claimed it was) - but as far as mind-numbing menial labour is concerned, it remains very important.

3. What other kind of equality would I be talking about as being bad if I myself have said I believe there's probably a "golden point" of partial equality at which gross happiness can be maximised?


Also, I'm kind of sure the original Communist Manifesto had nothing to do with the whole planned economy bollocks - it merely talked about wealth redistribution, and I don't think it was ever meant to be an evil dictatorship. Kind of hard to watch out for the rights of the common folk when you're too busy pointing AK-47s at them. It just seems like too much of a self-defeating system to me.

1. Yes but what you deduced from it was just plain damn weird and wrong.

2. Your post heavily implied everything comes down to money.

[Sachaztan]

And that's what makes it the perfect system. A utopia would use communism.

First, of all there's several schools of thought in communism. There's for an example communists that aren't even marxists.

Second, by what norms and criteria do you attribute "perfection" to this communist utopia of yours? Which communist ideology are you referring to? How is it perfect and for who?

Third, none of them are "perfect". There is no "perfect" political and economical system known to mankind. Tbh even anarchism is better than communism and that ain't a perfect or a useful system either.

[AmPM]

People fail to understand that one person perfect may be the opposite of another persons.

I would hate living in a society where no matter what I did I would be the same as the person next to me.

[jackmccrack]

Ah, AmPM. The quintessential American.

[Sachaztan]

Ah, AmPM. The quintessential American.

He's still right though. What's great for one person might be awful for another.

[AmPM]

Ah, AmPM. The quintessential American.

God forbid we compete and become better through it.

If humanity ever wants to get anywhere, it will be through competition and strife. Just as any other species only adapts to the pressure put on it so do we. This functions on a social level as well. Societies that stagnate or are in a vacuum get nowhere. Notice the highly advanced societies of the Amazon basin....no outside pressure, no reason to change, and still hunter gatherers...

[PonySlaystation]

Now, if pony would give me a answer.

Because then instead of an organized structure based on supply and demand you have a few people saying we need x amount of these. It's very difficult to estimate the amount of wares people need so the result is shortages, delays or an excess amount of wares. In reality this and other similar problems makes it very inefficient.

[Vermillion_Hawk]

In the end it really comes down to the duality of humanity in general. Where there is life, there is death, and where there is order, so too must there be chaos. This is why a utopia can never exist. I'm not saying we shouldn't attempt to make a society where the greatest amount of people are happy - in fact, I'd say Western society is already close to that. It's that one should not strive for something so unattainable. The story of Icarus, perhaps, is best applied here.

Also, Dark, perhaps read "Atlas Shrugged" and then come back and say the whole "from each according to ability, to each according to need" thing is still applicable to a realistic society.

[chefarzt]

I say make a society where 75 percent of the people are not stupid as fuck and talk like shakespeare.
Yours Truly,........

[Mysthalin]

1. Yes but what you deduced from it was just plain damn weird and wrong.

Probably was a bit hard to get since I wrote it while heavily underslept. I'll try to explain what I mean again when I can be bothered.

2. Not everything boils down to money, that is clear. However, given how many things do, and that the only thing we're trying to change in the system IS a change in money distribution - that is what my post focused on - the effects changing the money distribution would have on society.

I say make a society where 75 percent of the people are not stupid as fuck and talk like shakespeare.

Aww, but then you'd feel all lonely and left out. We don't want you to be unhappy Cheffie.

[PonySlaystation]

I say make a society where 75 percent of the people are not stupid as fuck and talk like shakespeare.

But then you'd be excluded.

[chefarzt]

I dont talk like Shakespeare u fuckwits
Or should i compare you to a summers day..............
Guess not

[PonySlaystation]

Shakespear is one of the most highly regarded intellectuals in history. The two traits cannot be combined.

[chefarzt]

Shall i compare thee to a filthy dog
Thou art more stinky and more desperate
Rough winds do shake your muddy fur of wet
Rest up (to) yours

edit: Fuck missed the rhyme scheme

[Killer344]

lol

[Mister Schmidt]

chefarzt ftw