by mikeflecheer » Wed 26 Mar 2008, 15:45:29
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vision-master', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mattduke', 'G')overnment subsidizes unemployment and penalizes employment.
linkI thought you were going to say the Rock-a-fellers.........

This is the last generation for everyone, doesn't matter what your name is.
Truely, this is an equal opportunity check out process.
by Fredrik » Wed 26 Mar 2008, 17:46:58
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('paimei01', 'T')he 3 % would produce. Look on CIA fact book and see that in developed countries only 3% of the population works in agriculture and there is food even for export
If the standard of living was the same, why would I bother to be in the productive 3% (or more likely 30%, in a world without fertilizers and pesticides) instead of sitting around home all day? There will have to be some material incentive to activate people. And without a regular day job, a substantial number of people will end up living in a way that is destructive for both themselves and the society as a whole. For the government, employment of frustrated, disillusioned people will be a bigger priority than standard of living itself (as long as the basic needs are met).
"Only scarcity and effort make life worth living."
"A fundamental, devastating error is to set up a political system based on [individual] desires." -Pentti Linkola
-

Fredrik
- Lignite

-
- Posts: 397
- Joined: Sun 05 Nov 2006, 04:00:00
- Location: Finland
-
by paimei01 » Wed 26 Mar 2008, 20:13:39
Golem about capitalism I like this quote the most :
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '"')When the last tree is cut down, the last fish eaten and the last stream poisoned, you will realize that you cannot eat money." ~ Cree indian proverb
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Fredrik', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('paimei01', 'T')he 3 % would produce. Look on CIA fact book and see that in developed countries only 3% of the population works in agriculture and there is food even for export
If the standard of living was the same, why would I bother to be in the productive 3% (or more likely 30%, in a world without fertilizers and pesticides) instead of sitting around home all day? There will have to be some material incentive to activate people. And without a regular day job, a substantial number of people will end up living in a way that is destructive for both themselves and the society as a whole. For the government, employment of frustrated, disillusioned people will be a bigger priority than standard of living itself (as long as the basic needs are met).
This shows why the modern society is dead. Besides the people that would work in agriculture, for a period of their life, like serving in the army, the rest would be free to do whatever they want to improve their lives. Build nice homes, build an internet network, and just live
But with no money anywhere, so this system of destruction does not appear again.
People of the past did this and they were happy - they just lived.
People of today you say that they cannot do it for themselves, they need someone to lead them to hire them to make them happy ?
Why did the American Indians live ? Without "careers" they would have been bored to death !
Today's society takes the natural wish of all people to help their neighbors - their tribe, to prove their worth, and transforms it into death itself : "prove your worth but only for you, others are the enemy ! only you matter ! it feels good when you are above them doesn't it ?"