Man... lost-jobs, lost-houses, bankruptcies....

Discussion in 'Politics' started by AllHazzardi, Feb 8, 2009.

  1. AllHazzardi

    AllHazzardi Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2004
    Messages:
    339
    Albums:
    8
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Palm Springs, California
    Man, it's an interesting time of the year. Jobs going down the chute because companies don't have enough money to keep them. Houses going down the chute because people don't have enough money to keep them. Companies going down the chute...; Well you get the idea.

    Is it just me or does nobody seem to have enough money anymore? This is a really funny thought to me. There should always be enough money, because when you look at it, money is accessory to the whole operation. We work to make money, we spend it to stay alive and have fun and feel happy. The reason I find these money troubles funny is simple. Everyone has them. Literally. Everyone has them.

    (Little voice in background) Well that sounds horrible... why is that funny?

    Well, see, because if everyone has them, it means everyone just needs to do the same thing to stop having them. If everyone in the world agreed to stop charging money for everything, and then went on to do whatever they would enjoy, as almost anything would help us as a whole, then noone would be in a situation of not enough money. Not a system of barter, mind you, just free exchange.

    (Little voice in background) So wait, you're talking about communism! He's a red commie bastard!

    Not even in the slightest. See, Marx was indeed right. Capitalism does become Socialism. Socialism eventually becomes Communism. But what he didn't pay enough attention to was timescale. Marx thought that you could quickly jump to the "better" system. The problem is that in order for the "better" system to be "better" you have to have the benefits of the lead-in governments. You need Capitalism to set up technology to be on a high enough level to support the population; Check, we may be out of money, but we'll never truly be out of food these days. With responsibly managed social programs to secure the health and survival of the population. It is then and only then, that a conversion to Communism can work. With the socialist systems, the people are cared for 110%. With the technology available from capitalist times, the people are able to do far more of what they care about, while still adding to the greater whole's survival.

    So, how would we get there? We would have to arrive at such a system through an application of Capitalism designed to create it. Well, funny thing is, we've been in Capitalism so long that the technology is significantly powerful. So we just focus on it. Start building massive automated food production plants. Take every concern to make it green and humane in whatever way possible. In the meantime, this creates jobs for lower level workers, creates, later, jobs for higher level workers, and so on. You do the same with roads, and the internet.

    Ooo... but where do you get the money? Still capitalists, still have to think of that.... Oh wait... give incentive to those who do have it to invest in these projects. Not just little tax breaks, but massive ones, even full tax write-offs per capita invested. You want to make it perfectly lucrative, a guaranteed gain for those who have money, because that's what they listen to.

    So, that one little thing that needs to change? That tiny.... almost insignificant thing that prevents this all from happening? So small, yet such a hindrance.... so simple, yet so complex. We just all have to decide to do it. At least, everyone in the United States. Easiest way to do that would be to write a simple contract.

    Line 1: You hereby are granted citizenship on the grounds of your promise that your future productivity, whatever it may be, whatever you choose it to be, is primarily towards this country, the United States of America, or a company operating within this country and in exchange all necessities and requirements for your happiness shall be provided.
    Line 2: Sign here

    Really, that simple. Basically a contract of citizenship and work-force availability between the society of the united states(the people), and the businesses and government of the united states(the country). Money is not necessary to exchange between individual people these days, only between businesses and countries.

    Oh, and if you are plagued by visions of poor communist countries... not going to happen. See, what this is referred to as is a Technocracy. A rule by scientists, sociologists, psychologists, physicists, which make decisions according to benefit of technological advancement.

    What a world where everything was free, would be so strange.... You would have super-durable custom fit clothing that almost never wears out.... because it doesn't make any sense to produce anything less. You would have the absolute biggest and best electronics for the exact same reason. All companies would be happy because the engineers behind them could work non-stop on the most advanced piece of technology they can, because they can, they don't have to pay 50x more to make computer 2 than computer 1.

    Capitalism gives us the knowledge of what works, and drives it forward as successful. Socialism gives us the safety, security, and satisfaction to be happy. Communism is the next step, not because of a change of system, but for a lack of a need to exchange legal tender for anything.

    If your worry be of materials... we already have technology at the doorstep of solving that, all we have to do is be able to work on it(Not enough money now... :frown1: <- sad face).


    Little extra reasoning nugget: The economy has attempted on several occasions to tank, because that's the natural desire it has. So let it tank, and just change the system to exclude it, so its impact is not felt.
     
    #1 AllHazzardi, Feb 8, 2009
    Last edited: Feb 8, 2009
  2. B_starinvestor

    B_starinvestor New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2006
    Messages:
    4,409
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Midwest
    Phew..don't have the stamina to respond to the first volume of your post.

    But this last nugget..the economy hasn't attempted to 'tank' on several occasions. There always are and always will be recessions...business cycles that have been around since the advent of capitalism. Without economic cycles, capitalism won't work. In the long run, recessions are simply a necessary side effect of the most productive long-term economic structure that the world has ever witnessed.
     
  3. faceking

    faceking Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2004
    Messages:
    7,453
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    47
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Mavs, NOR * CAL
    always have always will... this one is a biggun due to the US real estate bubble burst.
     
  4. B_starinvestor

    B_starinvestor New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2006
    Messages:
    4,409
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Midwest

    No doubt. It was artificially inflated due to a number of factors...as you know.

    I don't have this at my fingertips right now...but I'll try to remember the key facts as closely as I can....

    Since 1905 there have been 22 or 23 bear markets. The average bear market sees a drop of 37% on the S&P - and lasts 1.3 years. The average recovery lasts 3.3 years with an average return of 131% on the S&P.

    This particular bear market hit as low as 50% on the S&P. The last one, in August 2002, hit -49%.

    Because of more media coverage, access to online trading, etc., the volume has increased dramatically since the late 90's - causing considerably more volatility. The volatility will also cause the up-turns to be more pronounced, too.

    When it finally does happen - what I call 'fear buying' (buying stocks on fear that you will miss out on big gains) will create big, big up moves in stocks. There is more money parked in cash right now (as a % of money in equities) than at anytime in U.S. history.

    I hope it's sooner rather than later. For everybody. Especially me.:rolleyes:

    FWIW, the healing/resetting of the mortgage industry/underwriting guidelines will make the real estate market and lending market much more stable and sound over the long-term.
     
  5. lucky8

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2006
    Messages:
    3,716
    Likes Received:
    17
    Gender:
    Male
    Well, when you have a private, central bank financed by foreigners and ran for profit, where the profit is made off of debt, who controls the rates and the amount of cash available, "business cycles" do tend to happen. Combine that with the amount of cash that has been flowing overseas, creating money and bonds out of nothing and backed by nothing, a money crisis will happen from time to time. The problem with helping consumers get out of debt is consumers are too stupid to get out of debt. You give them tax cuts during a recession, they buy booze and porn subscriptions. The only way to really get consumers out of debt is to enact policies that force them and don't allow them to borrow. Unfortunately, too many people make too much money off of people being in debt.

    2 things you need to remember: 1)At any given point in time, there is always someone trying to rule the world. 2)He who owns the gold, owns the world. These 2 truths of life have been existent since before the Romans, and nothing about them has changed.
     
    #5 lucky8, Feb 8, 2009
    Last edited: Feb 8, 2009
  6. Elmer Gantry

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    1,503
    Albums:
    2
    Likes Received:
    548
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Melbourne (VIC, AU)
    Fixed for historical accuracy.
     
  7. AllHazzardi

    AllHazzardi Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2004
    Messages:
    339
    Albums:
    8
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Palm Springs, California

    You call them recessions, I call them naturally built-up market desire to fall. Precarious nature of growth, you either succeed or you fail. Recessions and "tanking" are just combined potency of forces that downplay the market. The thing is, it's no longer necessary. When there were scarcer resources, or less available technologically-granted supply, it was necessary. Everything in our economy in some way is seeking its own downward spiral of loss and destruction. The possibility is always there, it's always a nagging, fearful thought. Nature of the system. Whole point of it.

    The point of a capitalist system is to drive technology forward to the level which it can provide social systems and basic survival. Then, eventually, that capitalist system is no longer needed and seeks to dissolve itself. This is what I interpret downturns and recessions as, these natural cumulative forces or desires of the system to halt. These are often destructive, but if we understand their purpose, we need simply alter the system to be ignorant of its impact when it is allowed to fail.

    And if you think it wouldn't work because of the "lands of the lawless", a simple truth dispels it. What use have the lawless of the lawless nature if they are accounted for, too?

    Every creature on earth operates with whatever system suits it. I say if we know what system would work best for all of us, why not seek to build it? Capitalism, Socialism, and Communism are necessary steps, and we've taken them in split stride. I say since we know the path, we don't need to take the journey. We can skip ahead safely, manipulate the system rather than forcibly tear it down. I just think it's time someone decided to try asking the guy beside him of his opinion. I think it's time the system shifts and works towards the benefit of the smallest possible unit.
     
    #7 AllHazzardi, Feb 8, 2009
    Last edited: Feb 8, 2009
  8. midlifebear

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2007
    Messages:
    5,908
    Likes Received:
    11
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Nevada, Buenos Aires, and Barçelona
    Allhazzardi: I'm impressed with your idealism. I like to lie to myself, believing that I'm as enthusiastically idealistic. But I know better.

    I've been mesmerized by failing economies beginning with my first awareness of the haves and the have-nots during the second recession of the 1950's and its inflationary effect on the US Dollar. By 1965-66 dimes, quarters, 50-cent pieces, and the new silver dollars were copper sandwiches even though we had long ago given up on the gold standard. The widely held excuse for minting copper sandwich coins was "Those fucking Mexicans are taking all of our silver coins and melting them down into bullion!" You could replace "Mexicans" with Chinese, Russians, India, North Viet Nam or even the Irish. No one was willing to really investigate or admit to what was happening as the USA began taking on unprecedented debt to finance bad diplomacy and an unjust war in Viet Nam.

    During the 1960's I was captivated by the history of the Wiemar Republic when wheel barrows of German Marks became necessary to buy a loaf of bread. In the early 1980's México was forced to simply remove the last two zeroes on it's currency to deal with inflation, thus plunging it into an initial two years of it's worst economic crisis to date. They eventually stabilized their economy but it's still ready to collapse at any moment.

    I've sort of hung around in Argentina watching this country's most recent dalliance with continuing cycles of inflation and collapsing economies. In 2001 the Argentine Treasury was wiped out (from abuse by previous administrations -- both military dictatorships and democratic governments). One Peso, which had been tied to the US Dollar (still is) equaled one US Dollar in the afternoon in the middle of a regular business week and the next morning it suddenly required three Pesos to equal one dollar. The Argentine middle class, which was quite large for a country of about 48 million people, was completely wiped out overnight. The crisis was so amazing that Argentina had a total of five different presidents within two weeks.

    Since The Squeeze and I came back in November prices have steadily risen on all goods -- durables and perishables -- with no end in sight while incomes remain at pre 2001 levels. The barber who cuts my hair charged 12 Pesos ($4?) to buzz my head November 4th, 2008. Yesterday it cost 18 Pesos. Even the über rich in this country are now suffering and looking for economic sanctuary -- if it exists -- in another part of the world. But the homeland of Che Guevara, who is regarded as an icon of revolutionary freedom in Argentina -- not a communist -- isn't ready to throw in the towel. This year even the leftist radicals have been rejoicing side-by-side with the conservatives over the 25th anniversary of their re-installed, new democracy. And despite everyone's acknowledgment of even tougher times ahead no faction appears ready to give up on the new democracy. You think Bush was a polarizing political figure? He's chump changed compared to the public opinion polls regarding Nestor and Cristina Kirchner who are playing tag-team presidents. Nestor will undoubtedly win the presidency again in the next election without any outside help. None of the several other parties can hold a coalition together for five minutes to decide how to lead this country. Regardless, just about every Argentine recognizes that everyone is in the same predicament and they need to stick together. National pride is strong glue down here whether you're a Peronista/Kirchnerista, Radical, Socialist, Communist or one of the few odd members of the Legislature not aligned or beholding to any political party.

    It's strange what memories about money/the economy that stick in my head.

    • My aunt in 1959 semi-bragging in the parking lot of the small town grocery store with a friend that "I just walked out of there with $20 worth of groceries! It'll take us month to eat all of that!"
    • My father commenting on the wealth of his best friend who had just bought a new 1961 Cadillac. "Of course he can afford it. He makes $15 an hour!"
    • In 1963 a new four-bedroom home with 3 full baths and a triple garage costing a whopping $16,000.
    • Government subsidized public school lunches jumping from 10 cents in 1956 then to 15 cents and finally holding steady at 25 cents until 1965 when the local school districts had to double the price to 50 cents. Suddenly, a lot of kids living on farms, ranches, fruit orchards were the "new poor" because they had to bring lunch from home in a brown paper sack. The shame!
    • My first year of college tuition costing $70 per quarter at the local State University in 1970 and feeling strongly motivated to graduate because four years later tuition had doubled to $140 per quarter!
    • Earning $35,000 (net) in 1977 and thinking "Hell, I'm fucking rich!"
    • Earning only $82,000 in 1993 and buying Top Ramen in bulk at Walmart for $0.05 a package in Redland, Washington.
    • Taking advantage of buying and then selling all those stock options offered by Uncle Bill in 1998, wishing I had done it a year earlier discovering the pangs of paying regular income tax AND capital gains tax on a part of my life I'd traded blood and flesh working 80+ hours a week.
    • Selling off a land-locked irregular 1/4 acre of dirt 1998 for $2.5 million and being treated with scorn and derision by the local bretheren and the private developers I held captive because they couldn't build their new Target Store without my quarter acre (including my deeded right-of-way) unless they got their hands on it.
    • Paying 35% capital gains tax on that $2.5 million and thinking ruefully "A million bucks certainly isn't what it used to be" LOMAO!
    • Coming back to the USA three years later and selling off 11.2 acres of undeveloped land zoned "agricultural" for a really, really big old wad of cash, suffering the delays and investigations into my finances and background sitting on my ass and waiting because I had applied to legally and publically move that wad of cash outside of the USA.
    • Paying 15% capital gains on the sale of that farm land (one of Bush's gifts to those of us with money -- a reduced capital gains tax) before legally being allowed to move the profits from that sale and thinking again, "Boy, a million bucks really isn't worth very much at all!"
    • Pining away in 2005 for the simpler times when I actually thought The Beverly Hillbillies were funny.
    And now waiting in the wings to see exactly how many wheel barrows of money it's going to cost to buy a loaf of bread and maybe some skinless chicken wings. Maybe a big soup bone, too? :redface:

    Poor me. More to the point, the poor fucking world! At least soup kitchens kept millions fed through the 1930's.

    I can easily be wrong, but the mind shift you're recommending toward building a better funcioning world will require a consensus by more than just a simple majority of humans to reexamine their existence and work on destroying the individual ego: that part of one's identity that controls appetites and from which what most of the world identifies as "evil" arises. But for such an event to happen would require a dissolution of all religions and cultural and ethnic chains that prevent the real spiritual growth of a man or woman and -- by extension -- humanity in general. I suspect at this point the best any of us can do is each one of us who can see beyond their personal needs to work on our individual enlightenment by helping others. One of the greatest things a person can do is to help others without being motivated by earning points for entrance to an imaginary heaven or simply mundane social status.

    Good luck. I'm serious.
     
    #8 midlifebear, Feb 8, 2009
    Last edited: Feb 8, 2009
  9. B_starinvestor

    B_starinvestor New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2006
    Messages:
    4,409
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Midwest
    Can you name any type of technological or medical breakthrough that was developed in a socialist or communist society? How about a windows operating system? A vaccine? A surgical procedure?

    Show me a nation that had a successful capitalist economy, that 'progressed' into a thriving socialist, or better yet, communist economy. Just one.

    If you can demonstrate a single example, I will entertain this ridiculous notion.

    It sounds to me like you just walked out of a political science class.
     
  10. mindseye

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2002
    Messages:
    5,685
    Likes Received:
    1
    Gender:
    Male
    Technological: Soviet physicists were well ahead of the curve on developing atomic fusion techniques. They beat us to the development of Nobelium, Seaborgium, Bohrium, and possibly Rutherfordium (this one is disputed), and these all occurred before the breakup of the USSR; since then, they've beat us to synthesizing five other elements. They beat us to a theory in atomic physics called the Island of Stability.

    Medical: In 1972, scientists at JINR Dubna discovered a technique that used radiation to stimulate the regeneration of cells; a refinement of this technique is currently used to treat bone marrow cancer.

    No way. I've played this game with you before: I provide an answer, X, and you weasel out by saying "ohhhh, X isn't really successful -- their unemployment rate skyrocketed to 0.8% last year!", or "well, X isn't completely socialist -- the tapioca industry hasn't been nationalized yet."

    In fact, I expect you'll find some reason to poo-poo the "just one" technological and medical breakthrough I provided. I have others.
     
  11. B_starinvestor

    B_starinvestor New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2006
    Messages:
    4,409
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Midwest
    I will look into your breakthroughs. Perhaps you are correct, though I doubt it.

    But my challenge was to name one country that evolved from healthy capitalism...to socialism or communism..and is still viable and productive in the global economy -- moreso than if it had remained capitalist.

    Perhaps I should have presented it this way..for every breakthrough from a socialist/communist country...let's see how many hundreds I can multiply that....from capitalist countries.

    No matter. The crux of this absurd suggestion in the OP is what I'm getting at - moving to socialism...capitalism is doomed to fail...Marxism. Utterly ridiculous.

    I'm begging you to research the hell out of this.
     
  12. AllHazzardi

    AllHazzardi Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2004
    Messages:
    339
    Albums:
    8
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Palm Springs, California
    That's where people usually look too far. I'm not talking about a required destruction of ego, but an operation with regards to it. That is to say, rather than a dissolution of everything, a ground-up snap-ordered system that is purpose designed to take it all into account and operate with it. So imagine if you will a world where rather than a single all-domineering society, you would find a world with every society that has more than one member being able to coexist through an over-system that organizes them. It's entirely possible to set up, I'd almost say easy, but that'd be pushing it.

    A destruction of the individual ego isn't necessary if you can get the individual ego on the right train tracks too.
     
  13. mindseye

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2002
    Messages:
    5,685
    Likes Received:
    1
    Gender:
    Male
    Oh, come on. It was the third most populous nation in the world, and you doubt I can't find one technological and one medical accomplishment in its seventy-year history?

    I invite you to look into these breakthroughs (they're not mine, but thanks anyway) and report back: a little actual research'd do you good.
     
  14. pym

    pym New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    1,400
    Likes Received:
    0
    Am i the only one who remembers Sputnik......or the first man in space?
    Russian.
    Or the invention of the Magnetron......Can you say Radar? ENGLISH.
    Why do we give this STAR INFESTOR a legitimate audiance?
    Is it worth the time and effort to entertain a mind-less fucking idiot TIME after TIME.
    It profits NOTHING. Much like STAR.
     
  15. AllHazzardi

    AllHazzardi Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2004
    Messages:
    339
    Albums:
    8
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Palm Springs, California
    You're challenge is.... for me to find information contrary to my claim?

    As I had said, Capitalism drives technology forwards, it's the entire point. No better way to advance technology than to pit it against each other. Additionally, people often need motivation and adversity based inspiration to invent and create new technologies.

    In a truly successful capitalist society, eventually social programs form, just as we've seen the US move, in retrospect, right to left, we are seeing a future of more available social programs. What is the purpose of a social program? Simply put, to provide the necessities of life to a citizen as benefit of the government.

    Now, take this system, a capitalist system with social programs. Look at it closely. Since the government takes a % value, and the employers are paying money to hire work to make more money, do you see how in this system the exchange of money between lower level populace/business becomes redundant and pointless, if you assume the people keep working? And before you argue that people won't work if you eliminate money, keep in mind that the primary reason to work and get money, survival, is already taken care of. There's not even any point in exchanging money at the lowest levels solely for tax purposes, because the government can just assume its income, or collect it from the companies creating products.


    If you think it's such a ridiculous idea, tell me why it doesn't work.

    Capitalist society drives technology up, Capitalist society adds social programs to protect its population, this combined with sufficiently enhanced infrastructure(agriculture, transportation, communication, energy) results in a situation where the exchange of money has become redundant.


    As far as naming a country that has evolved from health capitalism, to healthy socialism, to healthy communism, there hasn't been one yet for two reasons.

    A) The biggest economic world powers are Capitalism and Communism.
    B) Any new country or society not yet initiated in either is forced to pick a side.
    C) The stand-off nature between Capitalism and Communism caused enhanced downplay in the Capitalist system, and hard times in the Communist system.
    D) Because of this stand-off nature, Capitalism refuses to make its way towards socialism; refuses to follow the natural course of events.

    So what you had request initially, evidence of a communist country that has had more significant breakthroughs than capitalist country, does not make sense for me to obtain, as it's contrary to what I'm saying.
    The second request does not exist for the above reasons.


    Now, see, I do want to point out an important thing. I am not an Idealist. I am often confused for one because, hey, let's face it, a world where everyone's happy is pretty darn ideal. The reason I'm not an idealist is because I'm not holding up an Ideal and focusing on it. I may speak of it in a particular way, but I'm not holding it up above all else. The other reason it's not Idealism is because I can tell anyone every step required to reach this more peaceful world I speak of. I can lay out every technological, political, or *insert any other -al word you can think of* alteration that would be required to achieve this situation. I'm not saying "OOooo look at the pretty world, we should be like that.". I'm saying "Hey, doesn't this sound like a nice idea? Here's how we do it.".
     
  16. sargon20

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    11,370
    Likes Received:
    2,102
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Atlantis
    I was going to mention Sputnik which basically scared the shit out of the U.S.
    History changed on October 4, 1957, when the Soviet Union successfully launched Sputnik I. The world's first artificial satellite was about the size of a beach ball (58 cm.or 22.8 inches in diameter), weighed only 83.6 kg. or 183.9 pounds, and took about 98 minutes to orbit the Earth on its elliptical path. That launch ushered in new political, military, technological, and scientific developments. While the Sputnik launch was a single event, it marked the start of the space age and the U.S.-U.S.S.R space race.
    Sputnik

    Unfortunately they followed it up by marooning a poor dog in space.
     
  17. pym

    pym New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    1,400
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yeah....that was poor
    Laika.:frown1:

    P.S.: STAR INVESTOR.......always ahead of the curve in factual denials.
    Poor deluded Fuck. Could we maybe maroon star in space?
     
  18. MarkLondon

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Messages:
    1,986
    Albums:
    4
    Likes Received:
    16
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    London, UK
    Bacteriophages used in medicine in Soviet Russia. Not used in the west where we have to rely on failing, patented, profitable antibiotics. Bacteriophage - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Edit. Hmm, having read that, appears it was not quite that simple. But I'm sure they'd have been used more in the west if they were patentable or more profitable to exploit.
     
    #18 MarkLondon, Feb 9, 2009
    Last edited: Feb 9, 2009
  19. B_starinvestor

    B_starinvestor New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2006
    Messages:
    4,409
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Midwest
    I'll get back to this Soviet stuff when I have time.
     
  20. AllHazzardi

    AllHazzardi Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2004
    Messages:
    339
    Albums:
    8
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Palm Springs, California
    Just in the end, I want you to understand that what I am saying is not what I am saying for sake of government or squabble betwixt. What I say is that, wouldn't this be a nice way of life? Why can't we step aside from that which has helped us that we still do out of habit?

    If someone tried to steal something, the police would still get called, someone would go out and risk life, one person would get something they want, at least temporarily, then the group which controls does their part to catch them and return it. And I believe, if everyone agreed to it, we could stop trading money for services rendered. Instead, we can say I'll get you back for this hamburger at work at the refinery today. Instead we could agree to do the thing we enjoy doing for a living in exchange for our ability to get food. If the system were that simple, in that you only needed to contribute at some point to earn your right to a full stomach and a happy living, how many people would need to steal? If everyone were given a home, because it secures them such that they may be productive for the people in charge, people could work happier more comfortable lives. People could spend more time thinking about what's important to them because we don't need to worry about food or water. Think of the benefit of this decision. If everything were done to make life better, every research effort would go towards making life healthier and more prosperous, such that we may invite more into our culture. With sufficient recycling technology, we do not need to worry about resources. We could research ways to make delicious but unhealthy food healthy through use of symbiotic bacteria added to the guy. We would research more green alternatives because in the end, the planet supports us. It keeps us alive. Instead of ruling out such research because it's too expensive or the idea cannot win enough ears to find funding, how about we just research it? You get what you need to do what you want to do because when you do it, it'll in most cases help the greater whole. Those who cannot mesh with normal society are simply asked to live in a more sequestered way or to use virtual simulations of natural desire for delinquent activity rather than actual real-world consequential action. Processes come into motion to a purpose, to grow a crystal, to make a mountain, whatever. Eventually those forces cease. Capitalism is just one of those forces helping build us. Its time has come. We can continue on without it, so we should discard it, but keep its lessons close inside our minds. All I am saying is, doesn't that sound like a beautiful world?


    Edit: PS: Hmm, an afterthought, these always taste pretty good.... Anyways. If I really want to argue my point... alright, here it is, plain and simple. What are the major problems of the economy today?

    Corruption? Greed? Insufficient profits to create sufficient jobs? Unemployment rate? Crime? International wars? There are really quite a lot of them, phew, I'm a bit winded.....

    My question is, if these are considered our problems.... then doesn't removing money fix them? What use is a corrupt official if in the end, you only halt yourself? What use is greed in a system where everyone has equally in every possible way? How many jobs are lost to correct for low profits in a world where profits have no impact and research and companies can do whatever they would like so long as they do not harm anyone that did not willingy apply and have knowledge of potential harm. No limit on creatable jobs, no unemployment, that one is pretty simple.... No need for crime if you have everything you could want... War disappears because really in the end you do more damage than you gain if you do it.



    Fear nothing, fear nothing which does not give you a reason to fear it under its own power. Should something rightly fear you, step beyond it and become whatever you need to become to survive against it.
     
    #20 AllHazzardi, Feb 9, 2009
    Last edited: Feb 9, 2009
Draft saved Draft deleted