Illini Rule
Warlord
No, he just has too much time on his hands.
A question to Communists:
- Thread starter Emperor2
- Start date
- Status
No, he just has too much time on his hands.
Ecofarm
Deity
(Spinal Tap)
It goes to Eleven!!
Why not just make 10 louder?
But, ours goes to 11.
-----
Keepn it legal:
Where, when?
It goes to Eleven!!
Why not just make 10 louder?
But, ours goes to 11.
-----
Keepn it legal:
Where, when?
Spoiler :
greenpeace
Peacelord
Greenpeace: listen up. Pay attention. Achtung.
I was not talking to you. I was yelling at Viking. I think you did commit a debate foul earlier on, but I forgot the details. If you'd kept hush-hush about it I would have forgotten completely.
I know you weren't talking to me, I'm just saying that I made some points and seems you were unable to respond. That in addition to you calling me stupid (or a knucklehead specifically), makes me think I won the debate, which is a very scary thought. Please proove this wrong.
BasketCase
Username sez it all
Oh, by the way, Viking--somewhere in that huge hodgepodge, you were complaining about how long a person would have to work to afford college, assuming an $8-an-hour job.
If all the world's wealth (as measured by GNP) were divided evenly among every man, woman, and child on Earth (children need money too--baby food, those tiny shoes, diapers, etc) every person would get $11,000 a year.
That comes out to $5.50 per hour.
Be thankful you can get $8 an hour.
If all the world's wealth (as measured by GNP) were divided evenly among every man, woman, and child on Earth (children need money too--baby food, those tiny shoes, diapers, etc) every person would get $11,000 a year.
That comes out to $5.50 per hour.
Be thankful you can get $8 an hour.
BasketCase
Username sez it all
Yeah, I was too busy yelling at NewEgg on the phone for being so damn slow to replace my Guitar Hero 3 controller. I have important priorities to maintain here.
And, no--I didn't call you stupid. I flamed you. Big difference.
greenpeace
Peacelord
So are you going to respond to this post?
BasketCase
Username sez it all
I can't because there's no link. I went back through the whole thread and couldn't find one, either. I have no idea what you're talking about. Whatever it is, if it's that important, either fix the link or just post whatever text you want me to read.
Godwynn
March to the Sea
- Joined
- May 17, 2003
- Messages
- 20,524
The yellow arrow in the red box is the link inside of the quote.
greenpeace
Peacelord
I'm sorry I didn't make it clear, Godwyn is right.
BasketCase
Username sez it all
Do you mean this post?
If so, fine. If not, what the hey.
However, as world history has already shown, once humans hit on the idea of civilization, all forms of anarchy were quickly replaced by systems of authority. Meaning either that your ideal society is inherently unstable, or that your ideal society can't protect itself against those who tried to destroy it (in which case there's no point trying to have it) or that the citizens don't want it.
I don't know which of those three is the case. Probably all three have occurred a various points. Is your society unstable? I don't know. I consider the question moot, because I say it can't work even if it is stable.
Oh, and I killed two chickens when I had breakfast this morning. Boo friggin' hoo.
Most people on Earth are sane and want to live--they just don't know how to farm. Yes, they could survive on their own, but life would be dicey and miserable.
The only solution that doesn't involve violent force: dangle a carrot before peoples' noses until a number of them start farming. Whenever I mention this crazy idea, you get all whiney and complainey about how I shouldn't be threatening people with the "work or suffer" threat. But that threat already exists. Nobody is worse off if I go "hey, I'll pay you X if you do some farming". If I don't make that offer, people still have the problem of suffering.
My crazy idea is a solution, not a threat: tempt people with goodies. The people who are the best at farming will be the first to jump at my bait; the best farmers are the ones farming, thereby producing the most food per unit work, and giving everybody more free time to do other stuff. Such as play Guitar Hero.
Me, I'm doing my part by doing tech support management on the server farms that run your Internet. Thank me later. Or, preferably, just build me a replacement guitar controller, since NewEgg is being a bunch of slowpokes.
Edit: Greenpeace, the answer is no. I'm not going to reply to all your posts, because a whole lot of people are posting big long messages in here (myself included) and there's just so much material to keep track of that even a person with my vast intellect can't keep track of all of it at once. Or....well....sometimes I just won't bother because I'll be playing computer games.
If so, fine. If not, what the hey.
When questions were asked about how many times your ideal society has actually been attempted (not just by myself) the answer (also not by myself) was "few to none". So any proof will be sketchy because there have been very few examples from which to draw a precedent.
However, as world history has already shown, once humans hit on the idea of civilization, all forms of anarchy were quickly replaced by systems of authority. Meaning either that your ideal society is inherently unstable, or that your ideal society can't protect itself against those who tried to destroy it (in which case there's no point trying to have it) or that the citizens don't want it.
I don't know which of those three is the case. Probably all three have occurred a various points. Is your society unstable? I don't know. I consider the question moot, because I say it can't work even if it is stable.
Very probably. Just about everybody on the planet has tried to wipe out various other countries at one time or another.
I say I have provided more than enough proof, such as the logical contradiction between your two most important rules. But then, I have a lot more leeway. I don't have to prove anything. If you expect me to abandon current established economic practices I consider reasonable and fair, YOU are required to prove that YOUR system DOES work. And, since (as previously stated) your system has been tried very little (if ever) you have no actual examples you can call upon. Your society is based entirely upon hypotheticals, most of which I shot down with actual documented psychology and actual events from world history.
Yes I am. By not donating food to hungry people in Cambodia, I am harming them. By refusing to shelter four or five homeless people in my house (and I have room for a lot more) I am condemning homeless people to look for an unoccupied bridge to sleep under. By driving my car and belching ridiculous quantities of greenhouse gases, I am harming......well......everybody.
Oh, and I killed two chickens when I had breakfast this morning. Boo friggin' hoo.
Ref. the chickens and breakfast above. I eat eggs for breakfast two or three times a week. Every living thing on Earth survives by killing. Even vegetarians.
That it would suck ass if the entire human race starved to death???
Most people on Earth are sane and want to live--they just don't know how to farm. Yes, they could survive on their own, but life would be dicey and miserable.
The only solution that doesn't involve violent force: dangle a carrot before peoples' noses until a number of them start farming. Whenever I mention this crazy idea, you get all whiney and complainey about how I shouldn't be threatening people with the "work or suffer" threat. But that threat already exists. Nobody is worse off if I go "hey, I'll pay you X if you do some farming". If I don't make that offer, people still have the problem of suffering.
My crazy idea is a solution, not a threat: tempt people with goodies. The people who are the best at farming will be the first to jump at my bait; the best farmers are the ones farming, thereby producing the most food per unit work, and giving everybody more free time to do other stuff. Such as play Guitar Hero.
Me, I'm doing my part by doing tech support management on the server farms that run your Internet. Thank me later. Or, preferably, just build me a replacement guitar controller, since NewEgg is being a bunch of slowpokes.
Edit: Greenpeace, the answer is no. I'm not going to reply to all your posts, because a whole lot of people are posting big long messages in here (myself included) and there's just so much material to keep track of that even a person with my vast intellect can't keep track of all of it at once. Or....well....sometimes I just won't bother because I'll be playing computer games.
greenpeace
Peacelord
First of all, you seem to be implying that there is a complete lack of authority which is completely wrong (no authority isn't even really possible in any meaningfull sense). Second, citizens would pretty much have to like it or they wouldn't be there in the first place (and you haven't prooven that it isn'tndesirable). Third, if its never been really implemented how does that correlate to it being inherently unstable? Fourth, can you tell me why it can't work?
Hahaha. If the US invaded a group of citizens that are not causing any real trouble and killed them all, I'll let you consider the consequences of this US genocide.
I have refuted all your supposed contradictions. If there are no contradicitions, then the only way left to proove it would be to put it into practice. Also, there is no burden of proof on me, I never said I could proove it is stable and works (except for if I actually put it in practice), I simply refuted your proofs that it is false.
Lets say you were living in the society, you couldn't really easily provide for people in Cambodia. If you cannot suitably provide for them than you are under no obligation to help. Of course, if those in Cambodia cannot provide for themselves (because of events out of their control) and you can easily provide for them, than they would be the equivelent of babies and elderly, and you need to provide for them. This isn't a contradiction because you would be harming someone by not providing them with basics you can easily afford to give for which they cannot produce for themselves, and its against the law to harm (even if it is your will to harm).
You said if you needed to kill a human for food, what are you talking about?Ref. the chickens and breakfast above. I eat eggs for breakfast two or three times a week. Every living thing on Earth survives by killing. Even vegetarians.
And it would suck if the human race was so lazy they would rather starve to death than farm.
If you don't have the information to provide for yourself, those with the information would be obligated to provide you with such information.
Is that you can help provide the basics and do whatever else you want (that isn't harmful). Unless you really don't want to, in which case you can hope people are generous and share basics with everyone and not just those who cannot provide for themselves. Why should you be entitled to not have to do unwanted work more than others (beyond the obvious things I already mentioned)?
I know you don't like me saying this, but whenever you tempt people with goodies, you get prostitution and child labor. I mean, I could change your post to the following and the same concept can (and commonly does) apply:
The problem is that factory work isn't neccessary. Sure if people would rather have more plastic they will work at a factory, but under your system they are going to work whether or not they really want what they produce.
edit:
I completely understand, no worries.
BasketCase, all I can say is that you have major issues. I honestly think that you are just, quite honestly a person trying to suck up to Fifty,Most other people who have similar views to you, are more tolerable and thus more convincing, because they don't go out of their way to be a high and mighty AH.
greenpeace
Peacelord
Actually, it shouldn't matter how he/she is personally; the facts alone are the only thing that should be convincing. If he/she was a crazed psychopathic killer and he/she said that the sky is blue than he/she would be just as convincing as if he/she was MLK.
Up to a point I agree. However, I still think he is too full of himself for me to even take seriously.
greenpeace
Peacelord
I remember him/her saying something along the lines that he/she was trying to test his/her own beliefs, not convert me, which makes me think he/she is not too full of him/herself. At least he/she never made the argument "I am too good for this dribble" or "you are wrong because I'm so cool."
Fugitive Sisyphus
Escape Artist
I was referring to the United States and the capitalistic west in general.
A Viking Yeti
Carnal Leviathan
So was I...
A Viking Yeti
Carnal Leviathan
Dude!! Eleven posts in a ROW!?!?!?
You ROCK!!! Sure as hell beats my record.
The bad news is, I'm not gonna bother answering any of them for a while. Mostly because I've only got half an hour before I gotta go to work--maybe I'll have time to answer them while at work......
Well, another reason is because everybody else's eyeballs are already bleeding, and for me to swing back with 23 posts of my own will do absolutely no good right now. I certainly can't stress-test any of my own theories if everybody is too worn out to read them after slogging through yours.
God, I love teh Internet.
Edit: Change of plan. Per my previous rules, anybody who calls an opponent stupid or otherwise insults their intelligence, has lost the argument.
Viking Yeti, you just called me stupid. Game over. You lose.
No I didn't... I stated that you are statistically more likely to be stupid. The point I was making, that you totally missed, is that a higher level of education tends to be linked to a higher level of liberalism. The last bit was an over-generalized joke, if you didn't catch that...
A Viking Yeti
Carnal Leviathan
Interesting that you don't reply to any then... I mean, if I, and therefore my posts, are so stupid, should be easy to refute them... ...For the record, I reply once to individual posts, so the only reason I have so many replies posted is that there were so many statements made in the first place. Oh, and I'm not the one using bold, over-emphasized font in every other post, which I think would be 'louder'.
Fugitive Sisyphus
Escape Artist
1/4 of the population suffers from 'food insecurities' and 'undernourishment'?
You must be living in different world than I am. In my world there is a big obesity problem.- Status
Similar threads
