PeakOil is You
The Knife that Cuts All Anti-PO arguments
Re: The Knife that Cuts All Anti-PO arguments
by smiley » Wed 27 Sep 2006, 18:31:06
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')his sounds more like the politics of envy that appeals to failures than anything else. This is why socialism is so appealing to the masses where poverty is rampant. The funny part of it is that the poverty is produced in the first place by government interference in economic matters for the benefit of the priveleged few to the detriment of the majority; otherwise there would be a normal distribution of wealth.
You might want to rethink that.
The problem is gravity.
Money exerts a gravity field on other money. Assuming an equal initial distribution of wealth, this gravity will cause the system to coagulate, not to disperse as you assume.
Say you are in a situation where you can just pay your bills. Then assume that I have a little bit more money than you have.
I can sent that extra bit of money to work for me. I can put it in the bank, I can physically invest it. Alternative I can use it to enter that course that gives me just that edge for that promotion.
Soon you will find that I have lot more money than you.
On a corporate level unregulated markets lead to monopolies like Microsoft, Dell, Coca Cola, Ikea, etc. The same goes for people like Gates, Soros, Branson etc. They are the black holes in our financial cosmos.
Therefore regulation is necessary. That doesn't mean a return to communism (rather not) but things like antitrust laws are necessary. The same goes for social measures.
-
smiley - Intermediate Crude
- Posts: 2274
- Joined: Fri 16 Apr 2004, 03:00:00
- Location: Europe
Re: The Knife that Cuts All Anti-PO arguments
by mjdlight » Wed 27 Sep 2006, 18:57:01
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('gego', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mjdlight', 'W')ell, I'm glad to see there are other "fragile minds" out there.
Gego, there is nothing wrong with pursuing private gain -- WITHIN REASON.
Gego, there is nothing wrong with pursuing private gain -- WITHIN REASON.
Whose reason? Yours?
You are quite presumtious to think that your reason is better than someone elses reason when it comes to the appropriate level of consumption. We are either free, or we are commanded and controlled by others; to impose your reason is to impose slavery. There is no limit to what those in power might then impose, and ALWAYS in history those in power first and foremost impose what is beneficial to themselves and their priveleged friends.
Tell me where the socialist/communist systems of slavery have produced anything but poverty for the majority and wealth for the leaders. As I have pointed out in other threads, Gorbachev was vacationing in his seaside villa during the break up of the Soviet Union while the average citizen lived in a two bedroom flat, maybe with his in-laws. That is the way your system works and it does not protect the environment. It may conserve resources because of the ineffeciency of such systems, but it also waste huge amounts in the process of being inefficient.
In order to impose a limit on consumption, the gains that you consider excessive must be taken by force from those doing the gaining. Then what is to be done with these gains? Under all systems of government wealth is extracted from those producing it, and then used by someone else, so how is this going to save resources? They are being consumed, just by someone who did not extract them himself.
This sounds more like the politics of envy that appeals to failures than anything else. This is why socialism is so appealing to the masses where poverty is rampant. The funny part of it is that the poverty is produced in the first place by government interference in economic matters for the benefit of the priveleged few to the detriment of the majority; otherwise there would be a normal distribution of wealth.
I suggest that had by some means the average level of consumption been forced to be limited, that maybe total consumption might have been as great or even greater. This is because the number of children we have is linked to economic success. In societies living close to the vest, children are viewed as an asset, the more the better, so the world population may well have grown to much higher levels by now resulting is the same resource depletion. Total resourse use equals to the population multiplied by the resourse use rate, so if you artificially change one factor the law of unintended consequences may well operate to change the other, most like in the opposite direction.
The fundamental concept in this thread is that we will always live to the limits of the resourse base is a correct assessment; that is what nature has programmed into us. Things are unfolding as they should, both the exploitation of resources to the limit, the high rate of population growth, and the pending collapse of both. What we don't need is the imposition of controls (that will give rise evasion like the black market) that will somewhat hamper the ability of those who can take care of themselves in a futile attempt to save those who cannot take care of themselves. We much more will need rowers than passengers in the lifeboats.
Your critique of socialism applies to capitalism 100 percent and then some. Slavery and inequality are the hallmarks of a capitalist society.
And please don't use the USSR in your arguments. The USSR was not a socialist state, any more than the USA is a democratic state.
The closest anyone has come to fairly and rationally putting a limit on consumption are are the Nordic states.
Look at Sweden's response to PO and look at ours. Which is more rational?
-
mjdlight - Peat
- Posts: 67
- Joined: Wed 22 Feb 2006, 04:00:00
Re: The Knife that Cuts All Anti-PO arguments
by ECM » Wed 27 Sep 2006, 22:06:35
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('128shot', 't')he fact you are using the internet, ECM, is proving you're a hypocrit to your own message.
A) My work requires me to have the Internet.
B) It falls under little else.
-
ECM - Lignite
- Posts: 243
- Joined: Wed 09 Feb 2005, 04:00:00
I already went through most of this with Jaws, on the economic forum. Flashbacks! Flashbacks! Gego, you sound alot like him, but with a touch of personality. That's good. But I recommend hiding this ideology of yours once the peasants revolt.
