This topic contains 30 replies, has 0 voices, and was last updated by  HumanBean 8 years, 7 months ago.

  • Author
    Posts
  • #54703

    Picci
    Participant

    if i buy domain names bout this right now they’ll be worth something 3 or 4 years from now won’t they ?

    #54704

    bazzz
    Participant

    Probably, but the catchy ones like http://www.survive2012.com are already taken.

    #54705

    Deathbal
    Participant

    Simply put, Communism eliminates classes (rich/poor,peasant/middle/upper),makes everyone equal in labor and profit and minimizes, if not eliminates chances of alienation…
    Who in their right mind wouldn’t be interested in that?

    I would not be. But the jury is still out on whether or not my mind is right.

    Communism also eliminates motivation and or the drive to achieve. It may also eliminate a lot of innovation. After all, much of it was the result of the hope of getting rich.

    I say let insects be insects and people be people.

    #54706

    Stil8
    Participant

    @deathbal wrote:

    Simply put, Communism eliminates classes (rich/poor,peasant/middle/upper),makes everyone equal in labor and profit and minimizes, if not eliminates chances of alienation…
    Who in their right mind wouldn’t be interested in that?

    I would not be. But the jury is still out on whether or not my mind is right.

    Communism also eliminates motivation and or the drive to achieve. It may also eliminate a lot of innovation. After all, much of it was the result of the hope of getting rich.

    I say let insects be insects and people be people.

    Well capitalism doesn’t exactly let people to be themselves either… Plus, the system failed twice (black Tuesday and the crisis today as a milder failure), maybe more in pre-recorded history, so obviously it is a failed system of corruption, oppression and alienation.

    While Marxism hasn’t even been tried yet…USSR, China and all other commie countries were and are just disguising themselves as Marxist, while really they were and are dystopias under dictatorship…Maybe with Cuba being an exception, but I don’t really know how people are doing over there.

    “The Capitalists are undoubtedly a race, but they are not human.”

    #54707

    bazzz
    Participant

    I doubt that form of communism would work in the end, it ignores some aspects of human nature i.m.o. , and what deathball says has also something to do with it.

    That doesnt mean that the inequality we see in this system we have today is too big, even in “socialist” Europe, if it continues people will get desillusioned with the people in power and will call for a revolution.

    Not that i hope for one, what i hope for is that politicians actually are going to represent the people.Not that it will happen soon it will take some changes in how people educate themselves, being more critical without detaching themselves from the world and actually organise themselves in functioning organisations.

    But it takes some intelligent leaders, just a single one doesnt make it all ok.

    #54708

    Deathbal
    Participant

    I am sure you can find flaws in any system if you try hard enough. But it’s usually the people that create the flaws. Remember, high debt is bad in any system. And like Bazz said, politicians need to represent the people.

    Our little problem we have here in the US was not a failure of Capitalism, it was a failure of our government. They have gone way beyond the simple governing body they are supposed to be.

    #54709

    Stil8
    Participant

    @deathbal wrote:

    I am sure you can find flaws in any system if you try hard enough. But it’s usually the people that create the flaws. Remember, high debt is bad in any system. And like Bazz said, politicians need to represent the people.

    Our little problem we have here in the US was not a failure of Capitalism, it was a failure of our government. They have gone way beyond the simple governing body they are supposed to be.

    Capitalism failed a long time ago…

    And I have to agree that government change towards more selfless politics (more left-wing) would be a better way to handle today’s problems than changing economical systems, but Marxism still aims at a better life than any form of Capitalism…

    #54710

    Rommel
    Participant

    Zdravstvujtye :

    Not wanting to restrict anyone’s pay unfairly, I’m not sure that the type of salary caps being discussed recently are a good idea. I could care less if the CEO of a company makes $ 50 Thousand a year or $ 50 Billion as long as the pay is fair in relation to the profits of the company and the pay of the lowest level workers. A better solution seems to be tying the wages of managment to those of the workers.

    If the company is doing well and the CEO is deemed worthy of a raise, the raise would be applied to all in the company, such that the status quo is maintained. This is the way capitalism is supposed to work. Those that are productive are rewarded, FAIRLY.

    Under our current system of puesdo-capitalism, rewards seem to be doled out to those that have the best connections with little or no regard for their productivity or ability. If the company falters, the first ones to feel the pain are the workers. The unfairness is compounded by the fact that the problems may not be related to a decrease in the productivity of the workers and quite often, it is quite the opposite. Productivity increases, management pay increases, but the workers don’t reap the benefits.

    Under my proposal, the CEO’s would be paid a resonable percentage above the lowest paid person in the company. Not millions of times the lowest wage, but a reasonable amount that is sufficient to encourage those with ability to take on increased responsibility for an increase in pay.

    When times are hard and costs must be cut to keep a company solvent, each reduction in pay to the workers would be preceeded by an even larger reduction of pay to management. The idea being to keep managment honest and not unfairly penilize the workers for the faults of management.

    Most likely, a radical restructuring of this type will only be possible after the collapse of the world ecomomy and the loss of millions of lives. Hopefully I am wrong but fairness in life is much like fairness in sports. It generally isn’t something that those with an unfair advantage find paletable. This being the case, I see much pain in your futures.

    Do svidaniya!,

    Rommel

    #54711

    Deathbal
    Participant

    I agree with you to a point, Rommel. The only place we part ways is on what people “should” be paid. In theory it sounds good, but it’s not the way things work.

    Workers pay is not always directly related to management pay. Take any dime a dozen job like Walmart. If a place like that does well, it’s usually management that reap the benefits. So why shouldn’t the workers get a raise? Simply put, they’re not worth it. They can be easily replaced.

    Now don’t get me wrong, that was just an example. There are many jobs where it is to the companies benefit to keep good workers. Because they help the company. Which is similar to what you said, but it is the business owners and execs to determine this, not our government. Especially since it was a socialist program (CRA) that caused most of it. If they fail in this then the company should and usually does go under. The answer is certainly not a bail out.

    #54712

    Deathbal
    Participant

    Capitalism failed a long time ago…

    And I have to agree that government change towards more selfless politics (more left-wing) would be a better way to handle today’s problems than changing economical systems, but Marxism still aims at a better life than any form of Capitalism…

    We are on opposite sides of the spectrum. We really can’t debate. All we can do is tell each other what we don’t like about the other side. It’s sort of like…..instead of two people arguing about how Soccer should be played, one of us is talking Hockey, and the other, basketball. It all depends on your preference.

    I prefer our government to not involve themselves, period. Build the infrastructure, hospitals, roads, maintain law and protect the country. That’s it. The United States is supposed to be a Republic. They are supposed to represent us. Not tell us what is and isn’t fair. Not tell us what we should and should not eat. What we should and should not drive. It is their job to be selfless no matter which way they lean. Right wing, left wing, it doesn’t matter. They are supposed to represent us.

    Barney Frank should resign. He over saw and allowed the hosing crisis. Will he resign? Nope.

    Charlie Rangold should resign. He is head of the “House Ways and means”. In charge of taxation. He is an admitted tax evader. Oh wait, it was an oversight. He will not resign either. These are both left leaning.

    Will the people of this country re-elect these two? Probably.

    Oh and BTW, I do think the world will end or have some catastrophic event occur in 2012. Most of us will be dead 🙂 Hey, one of these predictions eventually has to come true.

    #54713

    Rommel
    Participant

    Hi Deathbal :

    If you think that it sounds good, then perhaps it is an idea worth considering more closley even if that isn’t the way things currently (don’t) work.

    @deathbal wrote:

    I agree with you to a point, Rommel. The only place we part ways is on what people “should” be paid. In theory it sounds good, but it’s not the way things work.

    Workers pay is not always directly related to management pay. Take any dime a dozen job like Walmart. If a place like that does well, it’s usually management that reap the benefits. So why shouldn’t the workers get a raise? Simply put, they’re not worth it. They can be easily replaced.

    Now don’t get me wrong, that was just an example. There are many jobs where it is to the companies benefit to keep good workers. Because they help the company. Which is similar to what you said, but it is the business owners and execs to determine this, not our government. Especially since it was a socialist program (CRA) that caused most of it. If they fail in this then the company should and usually does go under. The answer is certainly not a bail out.

    Attention unskilled and semi-skilled workers :

    To hell with you and your children, you can be easily replaced.

    Professional and skilled workers … We are currently educating poverty stricken areas. Not for the good of the people but because the people are eager to learn and will abandon their culture for a few pieces of silver. To hell with you and your children too. You will be easy to replace soon.

    Let them eat cake, LET THEM ALL EAT CAKE!

    Best wishes,

    Rommel

    #54714

    Rommel
    Participant

    Hi Again Deathbal :

    While waiting for the servers to activate I thought I’d waste some more time with this topic.

    Our representatives do not want federally sponsored health care for anyone other than themselves. When they incur expenses, they illegally pass them onto the rest of us.

    I can find nothing in the Constitution that requires the Citizens to assume unlimited liability for private debts incurred by our representives. Charges for medical care is a private debt. Instead I find that compensation for services shall be paid directly to them at a legally predetermined rate from the treasury.

    Article 1 – Section 6 states: The Senators and Representatives shall receive a Compensation for their Services, to be ascertained by Law, and paid out of the Treasury of the United States.

    The practice in effect at this time provides hospitals and doctors with an unlimited account for making withdrawls from our tax dollars.

    This unjustified and should be eliminated immediately.

    They are not Royals after all, just regular people like the rest of us. It’s no wonder that they don’t have clue about health care or much of anything else. What they need is a good, healthy dose of reality and a fixed salary not more hospitals that they can use for free.

    The Constitution of the United States of America, it is very clear as to the limits, powers and responsibilities of the Federal goverment. To the best of my understanding, building hospitals is not on the list of things they are either entitled or required to persue.

    Thus, I find it very unfair to burden future tax payers with the cost of building hosptials that they would then have to pay to use. Especially while still being required to pay for the health care of OUR (so called) representives.

    Fortunatley, if I understand you correctly, under the form of society you appear to favor, we won’t need many hospitals. Perhaps you didn’t consider how much more cost efficient it is to euthanize the infirm than to treat them. This would be especially true if they are non-skilled and definately a must if they aren’t expected to return to the work force in a timely fashion, regardless of their expertise.

    “They can be easily replaced.”

    @deathbal wrote:

    I prefer our government to not involve themselves, period. Build the infrastructure, hospitals, roads, maintain law and protect the country. That’s it. The United States is supposed to be a Republic. They are supposed to represent us. Not tell us what is and isn’t fair. Not tell us what we should and should not eat. What we should and should not drive. It is their job to be selfless no matter which way they lean. Right wing, left wing, it doesn’t matter. They are supposed to represent us.

    In closing, I found it very odd that you seemed to overlook my previous comments on fairness and that your only mention of fairness was that you don’t want the government telling us what is fair. This was compounded by your assertion that you expect them to maintain the laws.

    Laws should passed for NO OTHER REASON than to regulate and enforce fairness in our dealings with others.

    Fairness, it isn’t new, it’s just very rare … Think about it.

    Later,

    Rommel

    #54715

    Deathbal
    Participant

    Yes Rommel, I said easily replaced and I stand by it.

    I am a toll collector for the NJ Turnpike. Do you know what a full time collector makes? 30+ dollars an hour plus full benefits. Can I be replaced? You bet. But I already know this. I am not so filled with self importance that I do not realize this. And I do not want any law in place forcing my boss to artificially raise my standing at my job. That is an insult to me and just plain silly.

    If you want to get into fair, then look it up in the dictionary. People seem to have their own interpretation depending on who you talk to.

    You seem to like the Constitution. Tell me where the Government has the right tell a business what they can and cannot pay their employees.

    Also, and I know this might upset you, but when people start a business they do not start one with the intention of providing health care. They do not hire workers so that they can give them benefits. No one says……oh, I’m starting a business…..I can’t wait to support 5000 families. No sir indeed. People start a business for profit. If you want the government to get involved, then let them take over all business in the US. Please, find that in the Constitution.

    Oh and BTW, you might want to read over my last post. I am pretty sure I mentioned hospitals.

    #54716

    bazzz
    Participant

    Maybe its just wrong to talk about politics if you want to keep a forum civilised, it sure wont result in a constructive and reasonable discussion.

    Ah well i suppose i could point out what i think are misconceptions and factual errors but would anyone care? doubt it.

    Maybe i should make a poll: has anyone had a constructive disagreement on the internet when it comes to politics?

    Maybe our time is better wasted watching porn instead.

    #54717

    Deathbal
    Participant

    You are probably right, Bazzz. But this is mild compared to most political threads on the net. The real crime here was hijacking this thread. It is supposed to be about 2012.

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 32 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.