[ReverseEngineer]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Quinny', 'S')ounds to me a bit like the central tenet of Marxism.

[wisconsin_cur]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ReverseEngineer', 'I') am not for supporting anyone who cannot make a contribution to the society. You don't cut the mustard, you are OUT. As in DEAD. I myself am prepared to walk into the great beyond the moment I become a drain on the society. I will give myself up to the Bear the day that happens. End of Story.

Reverse Engineer

[mrobert]

The guy is pretty much right (ReverseEngineer).
We tried (and succeded in) building a society where EVERYONE can live just fine, regardless of their contribution. That worked until the time we had cheap energy and resources that allowed 1 person to create enough for X persons (where X > 1).

As resources are tight, X closes down to 1 and we start having a lot of systematic problems.

I saw a guy commenting on the failure of Lehman Brothers, that government should intervene, to help them keep their jobs at Lehman. Right, we are so dependent on the hardwork of those fine folks.

Why is it that all the companies that are now failing, seem to provide services or products that we really don't need that much, and their business worked, as long as they just could simply rip-off everyone?

Why don't we see bankruptcies in the food industry, the software industry, etc?

-----
Pretty much, everyone of us is a bank of it's own. We "lend" out our resources, trying to make a gain on them. And pretty much everyone does a great job.

Bailing out big banks is like bailing out a guy who sold everything and lost the money in Vegas. What's the point in doing that?

[wisconsin_cur]

MRobert

In many ways you are right, as long as no one person, party or group is "the decider" about who gets thrown to the bears and it is left to..., well I guess left to Darwin to decide who does or does not contribute enough...

and those of us who contribute enough are allowed to show grace and mercy on those who produce, but not enough or in a way valued by society at large.

[ReverseEngineer]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('wisconsin_cur', '
')The question is who gets to decide who is or is not pulling their weight and ought to "go to the bear."

Once you open the door than it is easy to push any undesirable through that door. Armenians, Jews, Native Americans, people who are an undo drain because they have the wrong political beliefs etc etc etc...

I think it might be called "fascism" ...but I would not want to be accused of baiting.

[mrobert]

@wisconsin_cur:

Don't ge me wrong. It's not about who decides on who. Most of the time I say this oppinion, people start jumping on the "decision factor".

My oppinion is simple. I don't feel like supporting those that don't produce anything, through taxes, subsidies, whatever. It's not about me or anything else deciding.

It will pretty much happen. Like it or not. We are out of resources

[Quinny]

No baiting intended, although not a Marxist myself, I have studied Das kapital and a lot of the analysis is sound. ( Marxists often make good stockbrokers. ) I don't recall 'from each according to ability, to each according to need' being from Marx himself (not Das Kapital anyway) , but its along time ago now so you might be right.

Probably the central tenet behind the economic theory is that all wealth is created by human labour.

Which is pretty much what you were saying.

I also think your utilitarian stance is fascinating, and one which I to a certain extent can go along with, but.....

If I shared say a village with you and you could no longer produce your quota of food, because say you broke your leg. I certainly wouldn't want to lose you to a bear. I'd want to help you get better in the hope you'd do the same if i had a problem. Even if you were old and knackered, though I'd probably be at the same time, I'd certainly miss your ingenuity and the discussions round the campfire.

Elderly people often have a valuable role to play in any community.

I feel the whole debate on this site is often too individualistic and although I recognise problems with social provision and dependency culture, believe it's important that we recognise that collective effort is generally greater than the sum of its parts.

Having recently met Roberto Perez one of the Cubans who helped them through their crisis stressed time and time again the importance of co-operation and community in dealing with their special time.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ReverseEngineer', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Quinny', 'S')ounds to me a bit like the central tenet of Marxism.

[MrBill]

Well, I can certainly point out the fascist/communist/elitist/Darwinist flaws in a very flawed argument.

To start with 'supposedly' we need a whole new currency and something other than a market economy that up until now has not only delivered higher living standards for the greatest number of people, but at the same time as population itself was growing. Hmm, if it is not broke, do not fix it.

Secondly, from a Darwinian point of view apparently RR is advocating the survival of the fittest, but he wants to reboot the system, and start with a clean slate? How Darwinian is that? In my living memory of roughly three generations my grandparents and parents have worked to put me on a path, so that I could (hopefully) survive anything that life threw at me. Sorry, but someone explain to me why I should give that up, so that I could or my children could start all over with the trailer park trash and/or share my family/community/nation's wealth with someone else, somewhere in the world that does not share my ethnic, religious or cultural beliefs? Like all subsidies, which is not Darwinist, my loss is their gain.

Back to the economic argument. Supposedly the system has failed because it has produced winners and losers. Hmm, so if I lose my job I start over. If I lose my house, I rent, and I start over. If I have no money and no job somehow, somewhere the collective makes sure I do not starve. Afterall there are some 6.7 billion people on this planet, so someone, somewhere must be producing enough food and basic services to keep them alive long enough to turn 6.7 billion souls into 9 or 10 billion of God's little children. I do not think this is an issue of production, but one of distribution, ability to pay and, of course, sustainability. Under your plan, I lose my job, I lose my ability 'to produce' and I lose my life. Possibly my children and their children lose theirs as well. Great plan. Not!

But okay, back to Darwin, now I am facing a choice of wether I let my child or my grandchild starve, so that I can share my bountiful harvest with those that have done nothing to earn it, and quite frankly as I have already mentioned do not share my ethnic, religious or cultural values? Well, screw that. I will take care of my own first thank you very much. You can confiscate my wealth - once - like any good communist or fascist - but stop advocating such lunacy and then saying that you are not a communist or a fascist.

Why should the winners - those that have managed to accumulate wealth, that are healthy, that successfully reproduce in a responsible manner, that educate their offspring, that can provide for their future, until such a time that they can provide for themselves sign-up to your plan where not only do they lose - at a stroke - what has taken generations to acquire, but they get zero benefit other than to see their children compete in a no holds bared survival of the fitness (dumbest) lottery?

Thanks, but no thanks. Better to let those that have proven themselves carry-on. There is no reason to wipe the slate clean other than to give those that have already failed a second chance at the expense of those that have already passed that test. Again, not Darwin, not utilitarian, but a naked subsidy. So instead of the rich paying more than their fair share of taxes to support the poor we revert to a system where it is for all intents everyman for himself. Boy, talk about twisted morality.

I save my last point for, um, last. If I am raising a child that goes on to be a scientist or to make a great discovery they may not make that breakthrough discovery until they are 35, 45 or 55-years old. In the meanwhile, like every good agrarian communist movement, you would have them out in the field producing calories. So instead of having a labor separation in which some produce food and fuel, and some go on to make the great advances that mark civilization's advance - and maybe even solve our energy and environmental problems someday - you would have everyone down on the land growing melons. Not only a waste of manpower, but IQ-a-cide. Brawn over brains. I think Pol Pot tried to go down that route with predictable consequences. It failed. And so will your plan. Fortunately, no one is signing-up for it, so it is rather a waste of time to discuss it rather than a waste of human life and of human goodness and the values we have evolved. Thank goodness.

Every plan that someone comes up comes down to this. You want to confiscate my wealth and my labor for your benefit. Although I ask nothing of you. Hmm, there is a pattern there. Ayn Rand would see it clearly for what it is, so it is not even new or original.

[ReverseEngineer]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Quinny', 'N')o baiting intended, although not a Marxist myself, I have studied Das kapital and a lot of the analysis is sound. ( Marxists often make good stockbrokers. ) I don't recall 'from each according to ability, to each according to need' being from Marx himself (not Das Kapital anyway) , but its along time ago now so you might be right.

Probably the central tenet behind the economic theory is that all wealth is created by human labour.

Which is pretty much what you were saying.

I also think your utilitarian stance is fascinating, and one which I to a certain extent can go along with, but.....

If I shared say a village with you and you could no longer produce your quota of food, because say you broke your leg. I certainly wouldn't want to lose you to a bear. I'd want to help you get better in the hope you'd do the same if i had a problem. Even if you were old and knackered, though I'd probably be at the same time, I'd certainly miss your ingenuity and the discussions round the campfire.

Elderly people often have a valuable role to play in any community.

I feel the whole debate on this site is often too individualistic and although I recognise problems with social provision and dependency culture, believe it's important that we recognise that collective effort is generally greater than the sum of its parts.

[MrBill]

Ah, the pastoral lifestyle of the hunter, gatherer and farmer. Teach the young 'uns how to hunt and fish. Reminds me of Robert Browning. So romantic. Now, how to engineer a population decline from 6.7 billion to maybe 300 million? Maybe we can all survive by hunting caribou? Is your PC organic? Made from local roots and shoots? Connected to a bio-internet? Because I assume those that consume modern conveniences are as Evil as those that provide them? ; - ))

[ReverseEngineer]

Nobody proved themselves by having parents who buit something and then further built on that. I went to college with preppies who were given everything, thy had to work for NOTHING. I got better grades, because I was smarter than they were. I also got the same damn stupid jobs they got because I was smarter, but they came form people who had connections and got the jobs even though they were dumb numbskulls. Everyone running after MONEY, how pathetic! What a waste of a life! I quit that crap, you still immerse yourself in it, best of luck to you with it.

I highly suggest you return to your family and your land in Alberta now. Your system of trading is TRASHED. Completely. You cannot win this game, you are a small player in the game, even if you are worth a billion, and I do not think you are. Only ONE player walks off this table alive, and that player really holds no true wealth EITHER. Wealth is in your SOUL, and unless you understand that, you have no wealth at all, no matter how much money is in your bank account MrBill.

Reverse Engineer

[roccman]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MrBill', 'A')h, the pastoral lifestyle of the hunter, gatherer and farmer. Teach the young 'uns how to hunt and fish. Reminds me of Robert Browning. So romantic. Now, how to engineer a population decline from 6.7 billion to maybe 300 million? Maybe we can all survive by hunting caribou? Is your PC organic? Made from local roots and shoots? Connected to a bio-internet? ; - ))

[MrBill]

Life is a game of attrition. Some quit because they cannot hack it. Some leave because they have found something better. I will leave on my own terms. I do not need some stranger on the Internet to tell me what my values should be. All you are is a zero and a one to me. Have a nice life in any case.

[ReverseEngineer]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MrBill', 'A')h, the pastoral lifestyle of the hunter, gatherer and farmer. Teach the young 'uns how to hunt and fish. Reminds me of Robert Browning. So romantic. Now, how to engineer a population decline from 6.7 billion to maybe 300 million? Maybe we can all survive by hunting caribou? Is your PC organic? Made from local roots and shoots? Connected to a bio-internet? Because I assume those that consume modern conveniences are as Evil as those that provide them? ; - ))

[ReverseEngineer]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MrBill', 'L')ife is a game of attrition. Some quit because they cannot hack it. Some leave because they have found something better. I will leave on my own terms.

[mos6507]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ReverseEngineer', '
')The Borrower is usually just trying to survive

[Zardoz]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ReverseEngineer', '.')..I NEVER quit on an argument. In a war of attrition, I ALWAYS win. You will go down here before I do MrBill, you cannot outlast me. You will give up arguing with me. I GUARANTEE IT.

[EnergyUnlimited]

Borrower always have a choice not to borrow, or attempt to buy what he cannot afford.
He is not forced to take credit after all.

However if borrower is a moron and does so, then there is nothing wrong in principle with making him a *slave*.

On the other hand if lender is a moron and lend to those who cannot afford to pay (or work out themselves out of debt by actually being *slaves* and yes, they deserve such fate in many circumstances) then he should get bankrupt.
And those who are trading with such moron should also get bankrupt if they fail to secure some other means of funding.

Taxpayer should not pay for that.
Defunct financial system should be liquidated.
There is no use of it.

[Quinny]

Mr Bill

I respect your opinion and the coherent arguments you put forward. On this issue in your previous post you were defending your right to keep the privilege of inheritance and higly paid job, and then go on to point out how population will need to fall to about 5% of what it currently stands at.

Do you really think that if population falls to the levels you suggest that jobs like you currently occupy will exist?



$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MrBill', 'A')h, the pastoral lifestyle of the hunter, gatherer and farmer. Teach the young 'uns how to hunt and fish. Reminds me of Robert Browning. So romantic. Now, how to engineer a population decline from 6.7 billion to maybe 300 million? Maybe we can all survive by hunting caribou? Is your PC organic? Made from local roots and shoots? Connected to a bio-internet? Because I assume those that consume modern conveniences are as Evil as those that provide them? ; - ))

Why should the winners - those that have managed to accumulate wealth, that are healthy, that successfully reproduce in a responsible manner, that educate their offspring, that can provide for their future, until such a time that they can provide for themselves sign-up to your plan where not only do they lose - at a stroke - what has taken generations to acquire, but they get zero benefit other than to see their children compete in a no holds bared survival of the fitness (dumbest) lottery?

[mrobert]

@Quinny:

The world will always desperately need:

- politicians
- real-estate agents
- travel agents
- interior design consultants
- lawyers
- stock brokers

etc etc etc

I am considering to become a Peak Oil agent and consultant.
Anyone care to use my services?