A question to Communists:

[A Viking Yeti]

Okay, now that I've got some spare time to slog through Viking's awesome volume of posts.


Wrong. Wolves do, in fact, eat a lot more than they need. At mealtime, they don't eat all they NEED, they eat all they CAN. Because sometimes they go for as long as two weeks without a meal. The same for lions. The alpha males eat first, and most. At the expense of the other lions. Almost all intelligent species are like this; they eat as much as they can, and try to stash away whatever they cannot eat. Greed has a great deal of survival value; it is not learned, it is instinctive.

Animals in captivity, provided with an abundance of food, rarely if ever eat to the point of morbid obesity.

When there isn't enough food to go around, what do we humans do?

We go to war against each other.

I never disagreed that, when it comes down to either me or you starving, I choose you. Just that, given enough, I instinctively choose neither.

A broken clock is still right twice a day.

No thing or being in this world is so totally screwed up that it does absolutely everything totally wrong. Except rap music, that's the only exception. Yes, Russia beat us at a few things, such as steel. But the U.S. beat Russia at most other things.


Because in the U.S., the workers have always had the freedom to walk away and go get another job. And that, in the end, is what they did. They told their employers "we will not work for you until working conditions improve".

That's more statement than fact. And no, they couldn't always leave. I recall a set of steel mills where food and housing and such was deducted directly from pay. But they set pay specifically lower than cost, so they couldn't leave until they paid their debt, which they could never do. This was considered legal until the labor day revolution. Regardless, that's not what happened. Workers left jobs, and then demanded that the government impose working conditions on business. Ergo, they limited, to a considerable extent, the freedom of the market. That is inherently socialist in nature; therefore, the livable conditions of employment now are due to socialist imposition on the private enterprise. Not that anyone in the US is willing to call it that, but by definition that's what it is.

Wrong. Intelligence has no known relationship to political bent. I've read a wide variety of studies on the subject, and they all reach widely varying conclusions. One link I just read suggested that the world's smartest people are LIBERTARIANS. Libertarians are neither left-wing, nor right-wing. They're a mix of moderate liberal and conservative ideas. In my opinion, that's the way it should be--the smartest people are going to be willing to depart from cookie-cutter leftist and rightist philosophies whenever circumstances warrant.

I read the specific study I was referring to in Scientific America, and, if I ever have time to go through the innumerable issues I have, I may cite it. However, I don't really care... You seemed to take that statement more seriously than I meant it. Sorry if I came across like I was trying to insinuate that you have to be conservative to be stupid. I was more making a play off the statement that communist are usually teenagers.

By the way, libertarianism is defined as small government... My freedoms end at the tip of your nose idea. Also referred to as classical liberalism, I believe. But that's all semantics...

For a system to be practical, it must be able to protect itself from known threats against it. The Native Americans failed.

Addenum: also, they were willing to use terrorist methods in wartime, so the Hell with them.

Then I suppose nuclear weapons say quite a bit for the species as a whole. Kind of a myopic view of survival...

And when the protests fail? Nothing. Americans are accepting Bush's leadership. There are lots of insurgencies and revolutions happening around the world right now--why not in America???

Wasn't talking about the soldiers' viewpoint here. I was talking about George Bush's viewpoint. Greenpeace was all up in my grille about how people would do the right thing more often if the few "good" people actually got a chance to sit next to their fellow citizens and coach them to defy authority. Not true. The majority of Americans are telling George Bush that they want the troops out of Iraq. Bush is not listening. I've got the King of All Counterexamples there. Bush is staying on his course, and while American citizens are all about it, they're accepting it.

Because Americans are complacent and the idea of democracy keeps us hoping that in two-to-four years they'll be able to do something about their grievances. And you stated, in defense of the ultimate power of authority, war as an example. I.e. soldiers went to war even if it was unpopular. I contend that they do so in order to avoid a prison sentance; same with protestors. Maybe the US overwhelming military expenditures kinda' discourage revolution... Maybe it's survival instinct.

No. They are all different jobs. They just pay the same.

While I was in college, I met a whole lot of students who did in fact put themselves through college by working 8$-an-hour jobs. The difference between you and them is they didn't about it. They put their noses to the grindstones and did the work. Now they have diplomas. And backbones. Certainly more backbone than me--my folks paid for my college ed.

Um... You kinda' totally missed the point there. Obviously they either had scholarships or loans... ...In any case, lots of people about it. If they hadn't, why would we have scholarships and pell grants and such?

Same reply as earlier: broken clock. Living standards are higher in any part of the Free World (except Detroit), and the Free World DOES have a great deal more than "a dash" of democratic institution. Good model for Communism? No. Good model for totalitarianism.

No, they're not... Case in point, India... ...But I suppose that's another one of the broken-clock exceptions you simply have no refutation for, eh? I mean, if human nature is the way you say it is, Cuba should be in absolute desolate poverty... But, statistically, it's not.

As a member of Boy Scouts of America, I did plenty. Hell, I've planted more trees in my lifetime than any three Greenpeace activists (the environmental group, not the CFC member). Did I enjoy it? Yes. But eventually I realized I was merely enjoying it because everyone else around me wanted me to, so I hung up the shovel, put the merit badges away, and started putting more effort into molding my own life instead of letting other people manipulate me.

Caring about the benefit of the species and the overall well-being of our race is manipulation? That's just... Really cynical.

Just about everybody worries about accidents at nuclear power plants. Nobody worries about hepatitis.

Guess which one kills more people......? I've got lots more examples of this, but that one should be sufficient. Human worries are irrational. When I looked up actual malnutrition problems on the Web, I got indeterminate results, because Americans are kind of crazy--prone to overeating, prone to obsessive-compulsive dieting, prone to eating what they like instead of what they should. In short, most of America's nutrition problems appear to be self-inflicted by poor choices rather than by poor circumstances.

I wouldn't disagree with the initial statement, however...

http://www.worldfoodprize.org/assets/YouthInstitute/05proceedings/Jefferson-ScrantonHighchool.pdf

It seems to be intrinsically connected to poverty. So, if you consider poverty to self-inflicted, then your statement is true. If you do think people choose to be poor and that it is in no large part the economy's doing, then you're very, very wrong. I grew up in a trailer park, and I can say, just from first hand experience that it's not something they (we, to be honest) choose to be in.

 

[A Viking Yeti]

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.

$12,000, according to the International Monetary Fund. You're ignoring the cost of living. I lived better on $5.55 an hour in Kansas than I do here in Denver on $8.00. Unfortunately, global indexes on living standards are not really available, and the best estimates vary a lot (yay for economics... ). It's estimated to be about a third or a half of the US COLA... Though I cannot vouch for such estimates' accuracy (obviously). In any case, $11k a year is then equivalent to about $40-50k relative to the global cost of living; that's upper-middle class, and not half bad either. Honestly, I'd rather see that than the wealthiest 200 people in the world making as much yearly as the lowest 538 million... That just seem absurd and inherently negative.

 

[A Viking Yeti]

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.

Check the post below the one that I am now quoting... That is, as of 2002, yes, nearly as many people in this country suffer from food insecurities as from morbid obesity, making that particular statistic all the more sickening.

 

[mdwh]

Animals in captivity, provided with an abundance of food, rarely if ever eat to the point of morbid obesity.

Yes, but the situation where a resource is in _abundance_ isn't really important. The question is, how do you distribute resources that are not in abundance? Saying that people will not be greedy so long as it is in abundance doesn't really help - an economic system that only works for abundant resources isn't much use.

 

[A Viking Yeti]

Where, when?

2003, internationally, 10 million people. All time record, look it up.

An associates degree costs about 2k. If you can't afford that, or manage to save it, even on minimum wage... you need to move to a cheaper apartment or get a roomate and take a bus. Real torture there. Poor baby. And don't forget, experience is free. Get a job and move up the ladder. You need a waaambulance. [/SPOILER]

I don't own a car, I do use public transit, and I've been living in a studio apartment. $200k at $8 an hour, 40 hours a week, with an average of 20% tax, saving a full third of what I make would take about 670 days. Since rent makes up about 80% of my income, and living costs (food and cat food) another 10%, it would take me three times that. A student loans is really my only option then (massive debt that I'm hoping I can pay off).

Don't 'effin' act like I'm just whining. I'm point out an inherent inequality in capitalist society that is obviously self-perpetuating. I mean, you think it would be so hard for me to get into college if I was born rich? How is the system rewarding me for my hard work if it's harder for me to get through college busting my arse than it is for the offspring of some wealthy elitist who never really needs to lift a finger for it?! Is that fair or just? Is that pay proportionated to my output? You can act like it isn't a problem, and the market economy functions just fine, but when it comes down to it, statistics don't lie. 1925 GDP growth rate: estimated 13%; 2006 GDP growth rate: 2.3%. 1960 global disparity ratio: 3 to 1; 2004: 72 to 1. The system isn't functioning, hasn't been function, and will not be functioning any time in the near future.

 

[Dark_Ownage]

It's the same thing as slavery how can you not support it, It helps the person with the slave boosts the ecnonomy etc. Capitalism and we are trillions of dollars in debt you make no sense.

 

[A Viking Yeti]

Yes, but the situation where a resource is in _abundance_ isn't really important. The question is, how do you distribute resources that are not in abundance? Saying that people will not be greedy so long as it is in abundance doesn't really help - an economic system that only works for abundant resources isn't much use.

Um... Yeah it does. The US produces enough food to feed itself twice over and Ethiopia. I'd call that an abundance. We have 4% of the global population, and about 38% of the global wealth... ...Humanity has been, since the start of the industrial revolution, entering a post-scarcity era in relation to basic necessities. Yes, this isn't true of every, or even most, countries on Earth. It's almost universally true amongst the industrialized nations, however; so, when the third world nations industrialize, well... You probably get my point by now. I don't disagree that capitalism was necessary, just that it is quickly becoming obsolete (as is indicated by an number of economic measures).

 

[A Viking Yeti]

It's the same thing as slavery how can you not support it, It helps the person with the slave boosts the ecnonomy etc. Capitalism and we are trillions of dollars in debt you make no sense.

I'm not sure I understand you. Sorry, the grammar use is confusing, could you please rephrase that?

 

[Dark_Ownage]

I know I am going to start a ten page debate, a flurry of angry members, a few moderaters constantly watching me, when i don't really feel up to any of it, but I really need to ask:

When Communists look around and see the great that Capitalism has done, how can't they support it? Yes, there is poverty, but that is an unfortunate part of life. With all of the great things we have here and all of the people in America making more money than anyone else in the world and having enough to buy food and luxuries, how can they still not support it.

Thank you for letting me know.

Look how slavery has done it is the building block of every developed country without it it would not exist, slavery works period. Why don't we support that? Capatilism has only put countrys in trillions of dollars in debt and create this imaginary money aka inflation.

 

[Fugitive Sisyphus]

Check the post below the one that I am now quoting... That is, as of 2002, yes, nearly as many people in this country suffer from food insecurities as from morbid obesity, making that particular statistic all the more sickening.

Huh?

Again I am not talking about Ethiopia and Haiti.

 

[mdwh]

Um... Yeah it does. The US produces enough food to feed itself twice over and Ethiopia. I'd call that an abundance. We have 4% of the global population, and about 38% of the global wealth... ...Humanity has been, since the start of the industrial revolution, entering a post-scarcity era in relation to basic necessities. Yes, this isn't true of every, or even most, countries on Earth. It's almost universally true amongst the industrialized nations, however; so, when the third world nations industrialize, well... You probably get my point by now. I don't disagree that capitalism was necessary, just that it is quickly becoming obsolete (as is indicated by an number of economic measures).

There's more to resources than food. As I said, an economic system that is only good for how to distribute things that are in abundance isn't a very useful economic system. That's the _easy_ bit!

 

[BasketCase]

It's the same thing as slavery how can you not support it, It helps the person with the slave boosts the ecnonomy etc. Capitalism and we are trillions of dollars in debt you make no sense.

Taking a break from the big long posts to do a couple of short zingers: I don't support slavery because capitalism works better. It provides better incentive and is a lot less cruel. Well, actually, that was my second-biggest reason. My first biggest reason is because I just plain think slavery is despicable.

 

[BasketCase]

Here's a second quickie. I came up with this one years ago, but forgot it until somebody in here mentioned their displeasure with the existence of an upper class.

Your own brain weighs around two pounds. Yet it receives about 25% of the ENTIRE body's blood supply. Divide brain weight into the weight of your entire body, and you'll discover your brain receives something like TWENTY TIMES its "fair share".

The brain doesn't actually do anything. Your brain is a fat and lazy CEO; he sits around on his fat ass and tells everybody else what to do. Surprise--it's the most important part of your body, by far.

The unpleasant truth (brace yourselves, this one is REALLY gonna sting!) is that some people in the world really are more important than others.

 

[BasketCase]

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."

For some perverse reason, I got some hearty laughter out of the part where a bunch of you were talking about me behind my back.

Yes, I have issues, and no, I'm not cool.

I used to be an obscenely nice guy. I was trained by my parents to be a good boy, follow the rules, be nice to everybody, etc etc etc. Then I spent forty years trapped in the real world, where I very reluctantly and very painfully found out that those rules do not work. If you are an honest person, you will not get treated fairly and you will not be protected by the system. How do you think I'm going to react to that???

What's wrong with me? I'm turning into an ordinary person like all of you. Stanley Milgram should be a stern warning to every last one of you of what you people are capable of. Listen to his words, and listen good.


On the coolness part: I don't wear rock-band T-shirts, I have zero body piercings, I keep my hair neat and closely trimmed, I shave every goddamn day, I only drive five miles an hour over the speed limit, I actually use my turn signal, I wear expensive leather shoes, and I avoid drinking at parties. I am not cool. The closest I get to cool is that I like blue jeans. But they're uncool blue jeans because they are not torn or faded anywhere and they are not a foot too long in the legs.

Oh, and here's some MAJOR uncoolness: I play Guitar Hero 3. And like it. Nerd factor nine, Captain!

No, I'm not too good for you knuckleheads (gee, there's that word again). I'm just another knucklehead like you. And no, I'm not too cool for you. I'm the King of Uncool. If I disagree with you, it's for actual reasons. I don't expect those reasons to make sense to everybody, because everybody thinks differently.


I hope I freaked out everybody in here. Screwing with peoples' minds is one of my hobbies.


Edit: Something else I should add--in the last few years, as my degeneration into a cynical jerk (yes--to whoever made that accusation, I am in fact cynical) steadily progressed, my dating life has improved significantly. Women will never say it, but here's how it really works: women don't want nice. They want confident and assertive. Show them confidence and assertiveness, and they'll respond to you in spite of themselves.

Sucks, doesn't it? I'm a jerk and acquired a very nice lady friend as a direct result.

 

[greenpeace]

Here's a second quickie. I came up with this one years ago, but forgot it until somebody in here mentioned their displeasure with the existence of an upper class.

Your own brain weighs around two pounds. Yet it receives about 25% of the ENTIRE body's blood supply. Divide brain weight into the weight of your entire body, and you'll discover your brain receives something like TWENTY TIMES its "fair share".

The brain doesn't actually do anything. Your brain is a fat and lazy CEO; he sits around on his fat ass and tells everybody else what to do. Surprise--it's the most important part of your body, by far.

The unpleasant truth (brace yourselves, this one is REALLY gonna sting!) is that some people in the world really are more important than others.

HAHA, thats a funny, but completely useless analogy. Except its kind of depressing when you think about even more. I mean As Viking Yeti said, the top two hundred people make what 536 million people make. Are each of those wealthy people worth a million times more? In fact, how are they at all more worthy? Why do we need people to have people with such huge power and wealth (which they gained on their ability to manipulate money)? Why can't the common people hold the power and wealth of that elite group?

 

[BasketCase]

Why do we need people to have people with such huge power and wealth

For the same reason your brain is vastly more powerful and wealthy than the rest of your body.

 

[greenpeace]

For some perverse reason, I got some hearty laughter out of the part where a bunch of you were talking about me behind my back.

Yes, I have issues, and no, I'm not cool.

Its not exactly behind your back, but hey I don't really see any issues (addressed below).

I used to be an obscenely nice guy. I was trained by my parents to be a good boy, follow the rules, be nice to everybody, etc etc etc. Then I spent forty years trapped in the real world, where I very reluctantly and very painfully found out that those rules do not work. If you are an honest person, you will not get treated fairly and you will not be protected by the system. How do you think I'm going to react to that???

I completely agree with you that you should not conform to societies ideals of "nice guy" because your parents indoctrinated you to become one. Of course, I"m not saying you should harm people, I'm just saying that doing things because you were told to is illogical and perhaps immoral.

What's wrong with me? I'm turning into an ordinary person like all of you. Stanley Milgram should be a stern warning to every last one of you of what you people are capable of. Listen to his words, and listen good.

What do you mean by ordinary? I would deffinently support being natural you for thats ordinary on an absolute scale, but I see it as wrong to conform to society to achieve relative ordinary (but I think I misunderstood that statement).

On the coolness part: I don't wear rock-band T-shirts, I have zero body piercings, I keep my hair neat and closely trimmed, I shave every goddamn day, I only drive five miles an hour over the speed limit, I actually use my turn signal, I wear expensive leather shoes, and I avoid drinking at parties. I am not cool. The closest I get to cool is that I like blue jeans. But they're uncool blue jeans because they are not torn or faded anywhere and they are not a foot too long in the legs.

Oh, and here's some MAJOR uncoolness: I play Guitar Hero 3. And like it. Nerd factor nine, Captain!

Awesome! If thats the way you live and you do not conform to social norms than you and I agree completely on that point. I also make no attempt to be cool (except, what I naturally want is different from you, but whatever edit: actually were pretty similar accept hair and guitar hero [althoguh I am a nerd, if I do say so myself]).

No, I'm not too good for you knuckleheads (gee, there's that word again). I'm just another knucklehead like you. And no, I'm not too cool for you. I'm the King of Uncool. If I disagree with you, it's for actual reasons. I don't expect those reasons to make sense to everybody, because everybody thinks differently.


I hope I freaked out everybody in here. Screwing with peoples' minds is one of my hobbies.

I'm in the exact same mindset as you (in this paticular case). Except, I don't like screwing with peoples mind, but whatever.

edit:

For the same reason your brain is vastly more powerful and wealthy than the rest of your body.

But why must there be a brain? Why can't the body rule itself (in the figurative sense of course). The body is naturally inferior in calculating than the brain, but there is no real master race inbetween humans. I mean a better analogy is like a small group of brain cells trying to rule over the rest of the brain (not perfect but more accurate).

 

[A Viking Yeti]

Huh?

Again I am not talking about Ethiopia and Haiti.

Yes, and neither am I... The statistic only counts working individuals. So, 37.5 million employed and suffering food shortages, 7 million homeless or in transitional housing, and 9.25 million unemployed, 4.5 living on misc. benefits (i.e. not totally penniless, but not technically working) is 58.25. 58,250,000 divided by the 2002 US population of 281,000,000 is about 21%. I round up to 25% because it is almost universally accepted that homeless counts are underestimates (simply because it's hard to count people who don't have an address).

 

[A Viking Yeti]

Taking a break from the big long posts to do a couple of short zingers: I don't support slavery because capitalism works better. It provides better incentive and is a lot less cruel. Well, actually, that was my second-biggest reason. My first biggest reason is because I just plain think slavery is despicable.

Heh... Something we actually agree on, . Though, I think he's mostly stating it in principle, not in the literal sense.

 

[A Viking Yeti]

Here's a second quickie. I came up with this one years ago, but forgot it until somebody in here mentioned their displeasure with the existence of an upper class.

Your own brain weighs around two pounds. Yet it receives about 25% of the ENTIRE body's blood supply. Divide brain weight into the weight of your entire body, and you'll discover your brain receives something like TWENTY TIMES its "fair share".

The brain doesn't actually do anything. Your brain is a fat and lazy CEO; he sits around on his fat ass and tells everybody else what to do. Surprise--it's the most important part of your body, by far.

The unpleasant truth (brace yourselves, this one is REALLY gonna sting!) is that some people in the world really are more important than others.

...Um... Because your brain dies without that much oxygen. And for the same reason, the brain makes sure every cell in the body also survives, has everything it needs, even if it's not being used. That's a really sad biological analogy... You should've thought that one over better.