Which Would You Choose

[Mr. Dictator]

What good is an A+?

Brain-fed pigs are healthier, I've heard.

 

[Gary Childress]

O.K then i vote A... it will be easier to motivate the downtrodden and get rid of this king of the universe

Congratulations! You have answered in what appears to be an acceptable manner as far as I can tell. Good luck in your future ambitions of overthrowing the king!

 

[Gary Childress]

Brain-fed pigs are healthier, I've heard.

You're probably making it harder and harder for the king to kill you. I'm sure he would be sad to have to see you go. But I would guess you would get a hat's off from his majesty when he sprinkles your headless, bullet-ridden, ashes across the troth.

 

[Gary Childress]

What good is an A+?

Well it beats being pig feed doesn't it?

 

[Tahuti]

Option B seems like a pretty boring society.

 

[Mr. Dictator]

Option B seems like a pretty boring society.

If you see material acquisition as the opposite of boredom, maybe.

I tend to think of friends, family, lovers, and experiences. All things that do involve material things, tangentially, but things that you really can't buy.

 

[Gary Childress]

Option B seems like a pretty boring society.

So are you choosing either option A or pig feed then? My guess is you would probably be treading a dangerous line toward pig feed with your complaint above unless it is somehow stating your choice.

If you see material acquisition as the opposite of boredom, maybe.

[hint][sidebar]Good point. Do you think we as humans tend to get bored when we are not engaging in material acquisition? My personal experience and perhaps based upon a prejudice is that I am a creature of habit. I am accustomed to being hooked on computer games for example. But if I were forced to give up computer games it wouldn't be the end of the world. I might even get accustomed to being without them. It's sort of weird that I don't want to give them up and yet at the same time I sort of wish I could. [/sidebar][/hint]

 

[Mr. Dictator]

Wait, this is all an elaborate question to get us realize that the choice between capitalism and communism don't matter, as long as there's someone upstairs who can shoot us in either one for daring to disagree, isn't it?

 

[Gary Childress]

Wait, this is all an elaborate question to get us realize that the choice between capitalism and communism don't matter, as long as there's someone upstairs who can shoot us in either one for daring to disagree, isn't it?

Hmmm. When I opened the poll my intention was to get the results of an either/or question. But the poll has sort of taken on a life of its own in some strange sense. Maybe I'm imagining it has taken on a life, that is a possibilty as well.

 

[Tahuti]

If you see material acquisition as the opposite of boredom, maybe.

It has nothing to do with materialism. A worthwhile life must have challenges that must be overcome, but enforced mediocrity is what takes these challenges away. If death is absolute nothingness, it is indistingiushable from living in a perfect society.

 

[Old Hippy]

[hint][sidebar]Good point. Do you think we as humans tend to get bored when we are not engaging in material acquisition? My personal experience and perhaps based upon a prejudice is that I am a creature of habit. I am accustomed to being hooked on computer games for example. But if I were forced to give up computer games it wouldn't be the end of the world. I might even get accustomed to being without them. It's sort of weird that I don't want to give them up and yet at the same time I sort of wish I could. [/sidebar][/hint]

no revolutionaries everywhere give up material things when overthrowing "kings" of all sizes... as do little old ladies when they volunteer to help the poor

anything people do for free (even playing computer games) comes at the cost of not pursing more wealth/ more things.... playing golf although expensive comes with the cost of not pursuing more wealth/things

 

[CommonKnowledge]

It has nothing to do with materialism. A worthwhile life must have challenges that must be overcome, but enforced mediocrity is what takes these challenges away.

Option B doesn't remove challenge, you could still excell in sports, arts and academia. The only difference would be that now you no longer need to worry about being laid off due to cuts and end up getting your house repossed.

 

[Perfection]

Well it beats being pig feed doesn't it?

I dunno, the King of the Universe strikes me as sort of a douche. Sorta like getting an A+ from Hitler.

 

[Gary Childress]

no revolutionaries everywhere give up material things when overthrowing "kings" of all sizes... as do little old ladies when they volunteer to help the poor

anything people do for free (even playing computer games) comes at the cost of not pursing more wealth/ more things.... playing golf although expensive comes with the cost of not pursuing more wealth/things

Wealth for it's own sake is sort of a strange thing to pursue if you think about it. pursuit of excessive wealth is essentially pursuit of the ability to do nothing while everyone else works, isn't it? I mean maybe that's OK but in a nutshell doesn't that sort of sums up what the pursuit of excessive wealth amounts to? Now if I work really hard early in life and earn excessive wealth to allow me to retire early based upon my early performance then that sounds OK to me. But to simply pursue easy money is sort of a bad thing when I think of it. I mean I like it when I get easy money but I guess it's not very noble of me. OTOH, if the easy money is only a little bit at a time, like welfare for those who find it too difficult to do work, then I'm sure most people would say that is OK, so long as the person is truly disadvantaged and doesn't take advantage of it.

Anyway I voted B and will defend my vote by saying that I think having some people rich and some homeless is worse than everyone having life long material security. Yeah, maybe I would have to give up a few luxuries but I would rather give up a little luxury than live with guilt thinking that I would rather keep my material luxuries at the expense of some people being homeless.

I dunno, the King of the Universe strikes me as sort of a douche. Sorta like getting an A+ from Hitler.

Well you voted so I'm guessing you can now say what you want about the king of the universe. Hopefully the king only wants us to vote and isn't concerned with what people think about him/her or whatever.

 

[Cutlass]

The newly elected king of the universe in those choices is a dullard and unfit to rule. Dispose of him and start over

 

[Gary Childress]

.....

 

[Old Hippy]

Wealth for it's own sake is sort of a strange thing to pursue if you think about it. pursuit of excessive wealth is essentially pursuit of the ability to do nothing while everyone else works, isn't it? I mean maybe that's OK but in a nutshell doesn't that sort of sums up what the pursuit of excessive wealth amounts to? .

you don't play golf do you,
the pursuit of excellence is time spent not in pursuit of excessive wealth

 

[Maniacal]

Mansions are over rated and impractical, while it would be novel to have one I would much rather have a decent house.

 

[Narz]

B. OR we could have a socio-economic system where everyone has life long material security, meaning everyone has a house, maybe a little below average of what we would have under option A but no one has a mansion and no one is homeless. Yes it's a system of mediocrity. But at least everyone has life long material security.

When you say it's a "system of mediocrity" what do you mean? How is a society where some people like in mansions & some are homeless less "mediocrity"? I'd imagine the security of not having to worry about being homeless or destitute would make people less mediocre as they could stop worrying about basic survival & turn their attention to greater things.

 

[Hygro]

I'm with Perfection on this one, I don't know what B would entail. Since the king was newly elected and has power, I imagine this isn't a permanent and forever case, so I will vote A while hoping a further discussion and analysis presents itself. There are merits to B, for sure, but what sort of society would result?