AWFUL news from the Gulf.

[JMarz]

Tbh, Finland doesnt have smoking women..
Trust me, im from Sweden!

Couple of exes were swedish

Fire red-hair + green eyes = rattled that bitches' insides.

(am I making mad-beatz again?)

 

[JeffTD]

logical fallacy overload. jeff, your arguments come from ignorance, misunderstanding, or not even being willing to legitimately look at alternatives. the venus project isn't the only solution, but it is a good one if you actually take an honest look at fresco's work. if all you can come up with are straw man arguments, i think you need to read more.

"We're all human - we're all fucked up, greedy, thieving, murderous creatures, and until some miraculous scientific discovery (which will no doubt be the product of greed and competition) changes things, we will always be competing against others for limited resources."

people are just born naturally greedy? really? i had no idea. we are taught the incentive of money. when i was a kid I wanted to be an astronomer because I loved the stars, planets and the Sun. When I came to realize it was going to be extremely difficult (money) for me to pursue my dreams, I was devastated. People tell you to find a "high paying job" or "one you can stand" because they are mostly repetitive. no one cares about actually making a contribution to society anymore, its all about making shitty products that do not last.

You seriously just used the same straw-man, ad hom arguments you accused me of - wonderful.

I stated my issue with the Venus project right below my criticisms of Fresco - a resource-based economy is a vague term, at best, and doesn't seem to address the issue of who does anything but consume said resources that are now collective property. I will be HAPPY to look at alternatives - present me with one and explain why it makes sense, and we can start having a discussion rather than pissing back and forth.

Read the last sentence in the bit you quoted from me - we are all competing for limited natural resources, which makes us all greedy. Remove social structures and put everyone in a forest - if there are a limited number of say squirrels to eat, we will compete with one another for squirrels. We all will want as many squirrels as we can get, and that's what leads to competition and conflict. Leave the concept of money out of the argument - it has very little to do with greed. It's just another limited (in theory it has to be for things to work, we're fucking this one up big time right now, though) resource that we're competing for.

The whole reason we need government and economic structures in place is because without them, we'd be constantly fucking each other over trying to get 'more than our fair share.' Sure, we do that now, but I'm not butchering my neighbor to get more squirrels, I'm just fighting him in the job market.

This isn't a new idea - this is seriously textbook Hobbes.

The only way you could disagree with this is if you think human nature is to be communal and to share, in which case I will say, for a third time, you will be the first to be screwed over by the system you believe to be false.

 

[colonel kurtz]

yea, soooooooooo...am i the only one who's wondering what's going to happen if they can never plug that damned thing?

 

[Chryst Krispies]

Jeff is winning the thread.

 

[Cyanide_Anima]

lulz. insulting your obvious ignorant argument is not an ad-hom. i even provided an explanation. are people born speaking latin? or born muslim? or born believing in ghosts? why do so many people think that poking someone's demonstrable fallacy is an ad hom? an ad hom would be if i dodge an argument (as you have many times in this thread) and replace a refutation or response with an attack on your character or another demonstrably false claim, which I have not. you've made other bald assertions in this thread that are also demonstrably false and have ignored just about every argument i've made. it appears you also, are guided by ideology and not raw data, or science, or facts. fallacies do not count. (arguments from ignorance, from popularity, from history, from authority, from ambiguous assertion, tetc)

of course when things are scarce, we will fight for them, or at least it is presumable because it has been demonstrated in history. in this modern age, things we need are made to be artificially scarce. industry does help though in some areas, say agriculture. if we didn't cross pollinate fruits, veggies, herbs, and grains we would not be able to feed the populations. but today, we have the technology to make things artificially abundant, so that we all can have what we need (reasonably, food, water, shelter, education, positive role models for the kids, etc.) and everything else is pretty much secondary. not everyone needs their own pool, their own chopper, their own car, etc. cities are not designed efficiently either, so we would need a much more efficient infrastructure. calling all engineers, work together. people just don't understand, ALL of our lives would be improved. i wouldn't have to worry about all my stuff!!! if everyone had access to what they wanted or needed, and were educated and knew that we don't have to horde things anymore, no one is going to steal my guitar, when they can get one, exactly what THEY want? they sure as hell couldn't sell it, everyone else has access to what they need as well.

hobbes is obsolete, why make that arument? its hundreds of years old. they didn't know basic science, or the human condition and had very little understanding of the natural world at large compared to what we know TODAY. we have to stop leaving our mindsets and ideals in the PAST.

fresco's RBE is not vague, he has many writings in the subject explained in great detail. read "Future By Design" to start. of course, he is not the only futurist with great ideas (even though fresco borrows a lot from other brilliant people, fresco is like a combination of many things he's learned over his 90+ years), there is also the Community Planet Foundation, RBEF. they all have the same core concepts, but differ in application. me personally, i have chosen a position on any of them, but the idea is GREAT, and can work if people's ideas and knowledge of the world at large (science!) can get upgraded to today's standards. that is the most important part. you are very correct when you say "if a million people are in a city with everything it will be mayhem", but if they have an understanding of what they are feeling, what the repercussions of their naive actions are.

i've read people comparing Fresco to Communism, Fascism, George Orwell's 1984 (fiction? c'mon...). people project their ideas, or ideas they read or are familiar with into reality.

say for instance I was at the bus stop a while back (my bicycle was in the shop...) waiting for the number 9, when some Jehova Witnesses approached me with the copies of "The Watchtower" in hand, condemning my listening to death metal, and wearing all black, and having very long curly hair. I told him I didn't beleive in ANYTHING supernatural in origin at all. another man sitting at the bench called me a Satanist. whom (Satan) I do not believe exists. jehova's witnesses walked away quietly. another man (a mennonite) defended me from the probably Baptist man and said "why would anyone accuse this man of being a worshipper of satan when he looks like jesus?" (I get that a lot, rofl). They all were just projecting ideas they had onto me. they had no real understanding of my position and simply were not interested because it created Cognitive Dissonance, or conflicted with the idea they had, which they had already drawn the conclusion to and simply work backwards from there. The reason I bring this up is because I've read other posts by you where you interpret something to mean what it literally is not. I'm not trying to insult you or "poke the bear", but further your understanding. sometimes feathers must be ruffled! or you can go on your path of not caring if you please and ignore me.

I'm not saying it's human nature to do anything. That is dependent on too many thing, Environmental conditions being the very most prevalent. if you were a ferrel child, raised by wild dogs from a toddler, you'd adopt their habits, their behavior, their eating habits, facial expressions, posture, and even vocal sounds. google it. it's happened with a few other species as well. humans are Social Creatures, our mental health completely depends on the mental health of the whole group, its part of why we have nations, teams, and communities (psychologically they are tribes).

you have much faith in a system that fails you (and by this I mean the people running our system are hacks, and couldn't plan a bake sale effectively), and will most likely fail your children's children as well. no one looks to the future anymore...

 

[JeffTD]

This is obviously going nowhere and you cannot be reasoned with. The fact that much of your above post was only marginally related to your argument and that there are contradictions within it leave your arguments with very little clout in my mind.

You say I have faith in a system that has failed me - I don't see how it's failed me, at all. I'm a healthy, happy, productive member of the society I live in, am currently getting a great education in a field I enjoy from one of the best schools in California/the country, have great prospects for future employment, clothing on my back, and food in my belly. I come from pretty average middle-class family - my dad worked his ass off to give me the opportunity to work mine off to get where I am today.

Just because you have failed in a system doesn't mean it is faulty or fails others.

 

[MaxStatic]

Just because you have failed in a system doesn't mean it is faulty or fails others.

Jeff FTW.


Other thing to keep in mind, one man's heaven is another man's hell i.e. we don't all have the same idea of "happiness"

 

[Cyanide_Anima]

that is true, but most people have such a narrow perspective, they don't take into consideration the whole.

“Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.”

-aldous huxley

 

[arv_foh]

A book

tl;dr

 

[Executioner213]

This is obviously going nowhere and you cannot be reasoned with. The fact that much of your above post was only marginally related to your argument and that there are contradictions within it leave your arguments with very little clout in my mind.

You say I have faith in a system that has failed me - I don't see how it's failed me, at all. I'm a healthy, happy, productive member of the society I live in, am currently getting a great education in a field I enjoy from one of the best schools in California/the country, have great prospects for future employment, clothing on my back, and food in my belly. I come from pretty average middle-class family - my dad worked his ass off to give me the opportunity to work mine off to get where I am today.

Just because you have failed in a system doesn't mean it is faulty or fails others.

I Drink Your Milkshake

 

[ParsonsMatt]

Money is not the best. Here is why:

1)The need for infinite growth, which is mathematically unsustainable and ecologically detrimental.

2)A "Corruption Generating" Incentive System.

3)A disjunct, inefficient industrial complex which wastes tremendous amount of resources and energy.

4)A propensity for "Establishments". Very simply, established corporate/financial orders have a built in tendency to stop new, socially positive advents from coming to fruition, if there is a foreshadowed loss of market share, profit and hence power.

5) An inherent obsolescence which creates inferior products immediately due to the need to stay "competitive" This little recognized attribute of production is another example of the waste which is created in the market system.

6)A propensity for monopoly and cartel due to the basic motivation of growth and increased market share.

7)The market system is driven, in part, by scarcity. The less there is of something, the more money that can be generated in the short term.

I bolded the parts of your post that demonstrated a poor understand of what money is.

Money is a generic term for an ideal medium of exchange, possessing these qualities: transportability, divisibility, high market value in relation to volume and weight, recognizability, resistance to counterfeiting, and memory. To quote Wikipedia, "A medium of exchange is an intermediary used in trade to avoid the inconveniences of a pure barter system.
By contrast, as William Stanley Jevons argued, in a barter system there must be a coincidence of wants before two people can trade – one must want exactly what the other has to offer, when and where it is offered, so that the exchange can occur. A medium of exchange permits the value of goods to be assessed and rendered in terms of the intermediary, most often, a form of money widely accepted to buy any other good."

The benefits of money are obvious. And frankly if you can't see that, you're an idiot.

To address your points individually,

1)The need for infinite growth, which is mathematically unsustainable and ecologically detrimental.

What do you mean by a "need for infinite growth" and why is this a flaw, and why is it associated with money specifically? In general, all living systems grow until they reach their maximum sustainable size, at which point they start to stagnate and/or die. Economies are no different. Humans are remarkable because they are the only organisms that can increase the ability of their environment to sustain themselves.

2)A "Corruption Generating" Incentive System.

What? Any system can be corrupted. Saying that money "generates corruption" is total horseshit.

3)A disjunct, inefficient industrial complex which wastes tremendous amount of resources and energy.

At this point it becomes obvious that you aren't talking about money, but have some bizarre complaint against what I assume is your vague notion of a free market economy.

Anyway, a really inefficient industrial complex is... inefficient... and not nearly as profitable as an efficient industrial complex. Capitalism allows for a competitor to leap in, have a more efficient process, and therefore have cheaper costs and lower prices. Lower prices = More sales and More Sales = More profit. The more efficient process is rewarded.

4)A propensity for "Establishments". Very simply, established corporate/financial orders have a built in tendency to stop new, socially positive advents from coming to fruition, if there is a foreshadowed loss of market share, profit and hence power.

Right, like guilds in the Middle Ages. Or kingdoms and caste systems.

Wait, those belong to feudalism, not capitalism... Does capitalism have any "establishments" like these? Aside from a government that makes the startup cost of business prohibitively high (hmm that appears to be a problem of TOO MUCH gov't, and not too little), no, there isn't any feature of capitalism that does this.

5) An inherent obsolescence which creates inferior products immediately due to the need to stay "competitive" This little recognized attribute of production is another example of the waste which is created in the market system.

This has nothing to do with capitalism but rather the people buying and the people creating. Consumers in general prefer buying disposable things for the most part, and why not? Is there really anything that bad with this? Computers are radically different every 5 years. What is your proposed alternative, that we slow progress down until the natural obsolescence of things is more to your taste?

6)A propensity for monopoly and cartel due to the basic motivation of growth and increased market share.

Wrong. Capitalism actually fosters and encourages competition. When you have a cartel/monopoly situation that is truly unfavorable, the incentive to start a company and undercut their prices is immense. Carnegie proved that extremely efficient production practices and undercutting competitors was the best way to make money and be successful. I read in his biography that he was asked to join a cartel, and declined, saying that he'd simply undercut every one of them and run them out of business before losing customers to them.

7)The market system is driven, in part, by scarcity. The less there is of something, the more money that can be generated in the short term.

Yes, but you're forgetting an important part: "The less there is of something, the more valuable it is, therefore more money can be made off of it". You say "in the short term", but you omit that this is also true in the long term -- why is that, I wonder?

You list this as a problem with money, but really its just a basic fact of life. Air is by far the most important thing for human survival -- we can only live maybe 3 minutes without it. However, its so common that it has no value. Likewise, diamonds are absurdly expensive, despite having very few practical uses.

The reason anything is valued at all is because of two things: Supply and demand. This is how it is. This is not a facet of capitalism, this is a "law of the universe".

 

[roy22341]

I'm with Jeff on this one. I think that you're ideal society is a great thing - but I don't see any way that it is possible. There still must be people producing, and who dictates who produces what? Someone will have to work in the power plant, but what if no one wants to? There's no reason to if there is no gain in it. So would the power plant sit idle? Or would someone be told they had to go work in it? Who would decide that? There are so many questions that I just don't think it will work - no matter how much education one has. Personally I'm quite fond of a competitive system, it gives me a reason to work hard and get ahead, strive for the goals I want, a reason to wake up every day.

Matt: Yes. To all of it. The basic problem is the confusion of currency and money.

 

[ParsonsMatt]

you have much faith in a system that fails you (and by this I mean the people running our system are hacks, and couldn't plan a bake sale effectively), and will most likely fail your children's children as well. no one looks to the future anymore...

Protip: The people in charge aren't supposed to plan anything. They're supposed to lay the framework and get the fuck out of the way.

 

[JeffTD]

There are so many questions that I just don't think it will work - no matter how much education one has.

I'm a polisci major and economics minor and in none of my readings have I come across a system that makes complete sense and works for everyone like Postmortem and Cyanide have envisioned.

Churchill had the basic concept right - democracy is the worst form of government, besides all the rest. I'd expand by saying that a capitalist democracy is the worst form of social organization, besides all the rest.

 

[MaxStatic]

that is true, but most people have such a narrow perspective, they don't take into consideration the whole.

Fundamental difference in perspective more like it. Plenty of people don't give a shit about your "whole" just as you don't give a shit about theirs.

 

[JBroll]

Postmortem, it would be a lot easier to propose and work towards large improvements in energy, environmental, and fiscal policy if it weren't for twats like you making it look stoopid at every possible opportunity. You make big, fancy-sounding claims and completely fall short on some very large support and citation needs; you use vague, handwavey feelgood bullshit like 'resource-based economy' with insufficient clarification; you miss very big parts of the picture that would allow for actual, possible change without completely destroying a large part of modern society. If you truly want to help the world, it would be better for you to hold your tongue for fear that you might make a great idea look bad.

Cyanide_Anima, take more care in accusing anyone of having a narrow perspective until you've shown that you examine your own arguments as carefully as you'd like us to believe that you've examined (the other) Jeff's.

(The other) Jeff, why are you wasting your damned time in political science?

Jeff

 

[MaxStatic]

Jeff, why are you wasting your damned time in political science?

The chicks are hotter than in the chemistry dept?

 

[JBroll]

Yeah, it's no fun that nobody is able to spend time around women with different majors...

Seriously, if that were the case then why wouldn't he be in women's studies, communications, sociology, or some other, even more squishy program?

Jeff

 

[JeffTD]

(The other) Jeff, why are you wasting your damned time in political science?

It's the only topic I'm interested in enough to deal with 3-4 years of college to study. I love sociology, psychology, economics, philosophy, and am mildly interested in politics, and polisci combines them all, more or less. My concentration is in IR which is mostly economics/sociology, so it all works! I plan on producing records or teaching high school, anyway, so it's more or less just a backup plan/to make my parents happy.

 

[PostMortem1666]

If we are all born corrupt, greedy, etc. then wouldn't a government composed of us be inherently corrupt, greedy, etc?

Let's quit the piss fest it isn't going anywhere.

Anyone hear about BP's twitter account getting hacked?

BP: Our Twitter Account was Hacked!!