[AgentR11]

That would be totalitarian dictatorship... with me as the dictator! lol.

[SeaGypsy]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyranny_of_the_majority

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human,_All_Too_Human

A bit of light reading

[Corella]

This "Every-man-is-the-architect-of-his-own-fortune-idealism" jumps even shorter than a naive "win-win-concept". I personally guess libertarian-lefties therefore a bit more ahead. To make a long story short: you can´t solve whole-system-problems by everybody seeking his fortune no matter what it costs for all.

[Corella]

Additional @Pops:

Whether or not the energy-world is declining is not yet proven. Irradiation of sun seems more than enough, we just need to organize gaining it. However, if we want to keep up with any chance to get away from fossils and club-of-rome-issues we need stable societies and modern economy, inherently landing at good education opportunities for all - a fundamental subject of libertarian lefties.
My favorite example is overfishing: the "Every-man...fortune"-concept leads directly to empty oceans! Just some simple contracts and some action to keep it could re-vitalize us a whole resource, equivalent to an industrial production OR geological sources. It stands for a most simple example for something in my naive words would be "qualitative growth". This leads to a demand: what actually is the "pie" you are talking about? It is not defined by just the word...

[Cloud9]

Government solutions give control to a political hack who tends to move back and forth between the hat of exploitation to the hat of regulation. Watch the movie Food Inc. and you will get an idea. As strange as it may seem private ownership on a small scale protects the environment. Consider the family farm in relation to the government subsidized conglomerates we now have.

[Corella]

...as long the pickup comes from GM and the current out of the wall, right?
And easy to say so, living with plenty of water and good soils. In other parts of the world, many people still migrate into slums...
Your example does not match mine in so far as fishing was not organized by private ownerships equivalent to a farm-ground (that is why the example matches the po-issue). In Greece even small fisher-companies or single persons emptied their grounds by means of dynamite long before...
I´m too old to follow "all-or-nothing-concepts" Cloud9. I would be quite at your site according agriculture in middle-europe or NA, but whether it would theoretically be possible, to continue green-revolution by such alternative concepts is under contrary discussion.

[ralfy]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Cog', '
')
Suggest an alternative economic model that works as well.

[Fishman]

Pops, glad to see you're coming around to what I've written for years. One can't call for moral high ground if one doesn't believe in morals. Unfortunately, seeking equal outcome creates moral hazard. If I know I'll get as much as someone else, why should I work as hard? Such is the failing of human nature. Equal opportunity will never give equal outcome, variables such as motivation and intellect will always create a spread.

"He's right, lefties don't do the whole morality thing well"
They can't, as noted above.
"'yea but, why can't we make everyone equally greedy, gluttonous and prideful?" or intelligent, motivated etc

"I think people on the right are more realistic," in that they accept the failings of human nature, give an individual opportunity, and they MAY achive,(but not always), give them an equal share, and they will do only the least amount.

"People on the right seem to feel (from my perspective anyway) at least put upon when they are "forced" to contribute to their brother's upkeep and even the general welfare (take the pun as you like LOL). " except people of faith.

"For a good while there the left could depend on the growth economy to make everyone a winner." I've written about this numerous times, peak oil is the end of liberalism.

"But whatever effect you point to, it is painfully obvious there are now clear winners and losers. " wow, the obvious becomes obvious, even to the left.


"In a declining energy world the game is less and less zero sum and more and more negative sum. Now, "getting ahead" might keep someone else down, soon simply getting-by might mean someone else doesn't. " ah, reality, its a bitch.

[Pops]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Fishman', 'O')ne can't call for moral high ground if one doesn't believe in morals.

[vtsnowedin]

I don't see our present problems as a moral problem but a statistical problem of population exceeding resources. Arguing about the morality of it solves nothing. Our moral codes were developed thousands of years ago under much different conditions then today and we may have to modify them to fit present reality. Most of what we consider moral has been handed down as commanded by god but in fact most moral codes are supported by logic as observed by the priest that formulated the code. Take the Judea-Christen ten commandments for example. A very logical set of rules there inspired by god or not. The first three give the priest a monopoly on all things religious and command everyone to follow the one true religion. Very logical from a priest's point of view and no doubt why they are listed first. The fourth sets one day in seven as a day or rest. That is something a priesthood could have easily observed as being preferable to unending toil as both men and draft animals need more rest then can be had overnight each day. Very logical to keep your labor force in top physical condition.
The fifth is to honor your father and mother. The social security system of it's day and as good a system as we have ever had for those with children.
Six through ten are the basic law of the land. Don't steal ,murder, or covet thy neighbors wife. All good logic that if followed leads to an orderly and peaceful society.
I've read that the sacredness of cows in India came about to deal with a shortage of milk and the taboos against pork in several religions probably came about from observing victims of trichinosis parasites.
So when someone rails against something as being immoral I question is it also illogical? I'd be much more concerned about the logic then in gods opinion about it.

[sjn]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Pops', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Fishman', 'O')ne can't call for moral high ground if one doesn't believe in morals.

[sjn]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vtsnowedin', 'I') don't see our present problems as a moral problem but a statistical problem of population exceeding resources. Arguing about the morality of it solves nothing. Our moral codes were developed thousands of years ago under much different conditions then today and we may have to modify them to fit present reality.

[vtsnowedin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('sjn', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')Morality is a dynamic thing, and an integral part of our emotional consciousness. It wasn't invented thousands of years ago by priests, what you're writing about is dogma and religious codes. Often conflated, and religious people certainly integrate the tenants of their faith into their belief system, so there is certainly overlap, but non-religious people are no less moral than anybody else.

[Plantagenet]

"As by the fires of experience, so by commission of crime you learn real morals. Commit all crimes, familiarize yourself with all sins, take them in rotation (there are only two or three thousand of them), stick to it, commit two or three every day, and by and by you will be proof against them. When you are through you will be proof against all sins and morally perfect. You will be vaccinated against every possible commission of them. This is the only way."

Mark Twain
- On Being Morally Perfect

[sjn]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vtsnowedin', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('sjn', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')Morality is a dynamic thing, and an integral part of our emotional consciousness. It wasn't invented thousands of years ago by priests, what you're writing about is dogma and religious codes. Often conflated, and religious people certainly integrate the tenants of their faith into their belief system, so there is certainly overlap, but non-religious people are no less moral than anybody else.

[SeaGypsy]

In the People's Court's of Rwanda after the Hutu/ Tutsi rampage (google it) those who had committed no less than genocide were regularly let free. Not by trickery, but by consensus. Rage, compassion, confession, repentance, forgiveness. These are very human, very natural aspects of our existence.

Some were executed. Some given life in a clay prison in the desert.

[vtsnowedin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('sjn', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vtsnowedin', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('sjn', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
').......
.......
.......
This still pre-supposes morality as an absolute, although corruptable concept. Within a religious framework this makes sense, but as soon as you accept there are those who do not fit, who would be judged as evil by the faithful, yet feel they live moral lives (and feel guilty when they don't), it's clear there's something missing in this definition.

[SeaGypsy]

Funny you say that, I'm currently seeing the inverse in my recently migrated wife. She still does her whole number as a Baptist, ( which she got from a combination of rapists up the male line of her family combined with some Southern Evangelical Sponsor Teachins ) but she is in an opposite world. Only the old and the poor go to church in Australia. The rich here are atheist or de-facto atheist (nominal Jews/ Catholics/ Moslems). She finds it weird that all these atheists don't try to convert her, something the rapists and Southern Baptist Teachins always said they would. Being a natural woman, intrigue is getting the better of her, kind of interesting to watch.

[AgentR11]

You note something there SG. Those attracted by faith, in your region of observation, are the old and poor, with (I'm guessing) a small smattering of solidly devout youth and mid-adults; and some leaning of the middle and upper classes on private schooling services provided by their church of choice. Here, I can walk into a sports stadium sized mega church, packed to the rim with middle and upper class folks in fine suits, doing the halleluja thing, convinced down to their bones of the Prosperity Theology heresy that God has anointed them with wealth and power because they are the chosen. And well, since they're anointed with such largesse, it is only right and just for them to enjoy the fruits of it to their heart's content. But they most certainly are believers, and they have money, and they have power.

This concerns me a bit, because they have interlaced their wealth and power, with their faith. For now, in our state of gluttony and lust, it fits in well enough, and there is room for it to be sated. If they come through this current economic downturn unscathed, does that not further reinforce their belief that they are the chosen, and their wealth is its proof? What happens later to these folks as involuntary power-down is imposed upon those beneath them, and begins to nibble at the bottom edge of their congregation? Will they voluntarily bow to their proof of salvation being stripped from them? I don't think so. Could their belief take them far enough to strip life sustaining aid from the truly poor in order to hold on to their own proof of being Chosen?