TakeYouToTasker Posted October 1, 2012 Posted October 1, 2012 (edited) Oh, good Lord... He is suggesting that if we make humans not have human traits, then we can "evolve" into a centrally planed total bureaucracy in which voluntary free exchange is replaced by subjugation and force... !@#$ing brilliant. He also seems to want to conduct some grand experiment in which we trust the production of our entire food supply to the same people that sought to "better transportation for all of the people" and produced the !@#$ing Yogu. Stop huffing paint in your mother's garage. Edited October 1, 2012 by TakeYouToTasker
DC Tom Posted October 2, 2012 Posted October 2, 2012 Don't even need to watch it. MDP, Zeitgeist, and Russia Times is a recipe for migraine-inducing stupidity.
MARCELL DAREUS POWER Posted October 2, 2012 Author Posted October 2, 2012 (edited) Oh, good Lord... He is suggesting that if we make humans not have human traits, then we can "evolve" into a centrally planed total bureaucracy in which voluntary free exchange is replaced by subjugation and force... !@#$ing brilliant. He also seems to want to conduct some grand experiment in which we trust the production of our entire food supply to the same people that sought to "better transportation for all of the people" and produced the !@#$ing Yogu. Stop huffing paint in your mother's garage. why would the capitalist system bring about a system that is not profitable? im not so sure he is even saying we have a choice, eventually, the environment will check are behavior regardless of what we think..... Edited October 2, 2012 by MARCELL DAREUS POWER
MARCELL DAREUS POWER Posted October 2, 2012 Author Posted October 2, 2012 (edited) Oh, good Lord... He is suggesting that if we make humans not have human traits, then we can "evolve" into a centrally planed total bureaucracy in which voluntary free exchange is replaced by subjugation and force... !@#$ing brilliant. He also seems to want to conduct some grand experiment in which we trust the production of our entire food supply to the same people that sought to "better transportation for all of the people" and produced the !@#$ing Yogu. Stop huffing paint in your mother's garage. i think hes also saying, and he would be correct if evolution is true, that people's values and actual nature would change because the environment would change... surely this takes time, and obviously it's not easy, but a world where you dont need to steal or subjugate others in order to eat and have energy would create a totally different social construct. in evolution, the best traits are passed down because those phenotypes best responded to the given environment and survived. but just in basic psychology, you are what your environment is... if a human is raised by dogs or chimps, they will be totally different... and a world where stealing food makes no sense because you cannot sell it, because it's free, and it is in total abundance. the value set would be dramatically different. this system is !@#$ing dumb, in order to create anything, you need to create debt, and without debt, the economy doesnt move. it's a self-fulfilling societal suicide. Oh, good Lord... He is suggesting that if we make humans not have human traits, then we can "evolve" into a centrally planed total bureaucracy in which voluntary free exchange is replaced by subjugation and force... !@#$ing brilliant. He also seems to want to conduct some grand experiment in which we trust the production of our entire food supply to the same people that sought to "better transportation for all of the people" and produced the !@#$ing Yogu. Stop huffing paint in your mother's garage. you wouldnt be forced to do anything, the food and energy is free. and not all aspects of monetary free market exchange would end. where tech has not replaced human labor, surely that would still exist... you are saying you are being forced to get free food, its a nonsense statement... Edited October 2, 2012 by MARCELL DAREUS POWER
TakeYouToTasker Posted October 2, 2012 Posted October 2, 2012 (edited) Your entire argument is dependant on a poorly constructed strawman which conflates fractional reserve banking and fiat currency with the concept of free monetary exchange, and conflates freedom and individual value hierarchies with theft. It also redefines the word "free". Nothing which requires any form of labor to produce, extract, distribute is free. Time and human effort are both commodities with values. Lastly, humans are not the product of some nebulous "enviroment" which came to exist out of random chance or in a vacuum. The enviroment exists as a product of basic human nature and aggregate value structures. To insist we are something other than what we are, and to then make all elements of life dependant on philosophical faux reality is a recipe for nothing but actual institutionalized slavery in the best case senario and for wholesale death by starvation in the worst. Every aspect of your argument disregards human motivation, and human desires. Edited October 2, 2012 by TakeYouToTasker
MARCELL DAREUS POWER Posted October 2, 2012 Author Posted October 2, 2012 (edited) Your entire argument is dependant on a poorly constructed strawman which conflates fractional reserve banking and fiat currency with the concept of free monetary exchange, and conflates freedom and individual value hierarchies with theft. It also redefines the word "free". Nothing which requires any form of labor to produce, extract, distribute is free. Time and human effort are both commodities with values. Lastly, humans are not the product of some nebulous "enviroment" which came to exist out of random chance or in a vacuum. The enviroment exists as a product of basic human nature and aggregate value structures. To insist we are something other than what we are, and to then make all elements of life dependant on philosophical faux reality is a recipe for nothing but actual institutionalized slavery in the best case senario and for wholesale death by starvation in the worst. Every aspect of your argument disregards human motivation, and human desires. i just said, those aspects which require human labor in any aspect would still require market exchange... if food, energy, and even some shelter, didnt take human labor, in any aspect, and tech took over, there would be no need to pay for it... it would be like paying for air, or to sit in the sunlight... that wouldnt make sense. nobody is saying we would live in a utopia, people are still jealous, people still get in bar fights, and people still are dumb, im simply saying life would be different if we let automation take over many of these aspects. a market system that is built on oil where 5% of the population uses 30% of the energy is going to cause major problems... if two people are in an enviroment where there is limited food, eventually they will fight and kill each other probably. changing the environment would change the social dynamics in play. but yes, people are both good and bad in any system. i would argue that most of the aberrant behavior we see, is because of the enviroment people are in. e.g. people being raised by dogs will act like dogs, people raised in a selfish, darwinian environment will act in a ruthless manner in order to survive in that environment... Edited October 2, 2012 by MARCELL DAREUS POWER
TakeYouToTasker Posted October 2, 2012 Posted October 2, 2012 (edited) i just said, those aspects which require human labor in any aspect would still require market exchange... if food, energy, and even some shelter, didnt take human labor, in any aspect, and tech took over, there would be no need to pay for it... it would be like paying for air, or to sit in the sunlight... that wouldnt make sense. ... So... If I'm getting you right, not only is your argument all of the things I listed above, but also only becomes relevant in an improbable distopian future in which the labor undertaken to research, develop, extract resources for, produce, and service technology has no value? Oh good golly gee-whiz, sign me the !@#$ up! Edited October 2, 2012 by TakeYouToTasker
MARCELL DAREUS POWER Posted October 2, 2012 Author Posted October 2, 2012 (edited) ... So... If I'm getting you right, not only is your argument all of the things I listed above, but also only becomes relevant in an improbable distopian future in which the labor undertaken to research, develop, extract resources for, produce, and service technology has no value? Oh good golly gee-whiz, sign me the !@#$ up! yes, you would have to pay people to develop this network of tech. it doesnt happen overnight. eventually some labor would become obsolete... it's as simple as that. im not sure we have a choice, the environment will check our behavior at some point... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bTbLslkIR2k ... So... If I'm getting you right, not only is your argument all of the things I listed above, but also only becomes relevant in an improbable distopian future in which the labor undertaken to research, develop, extract resources for, produce, and service technology has no value? Oh good golly gee-whiz, sign me the !@#$ up! dystopia? free food, free enegy? that would be bad? Edited October 2, 2012 by MARCELL DAREUS POWER
TakeYouToTasker Posted October 2, 2012 Posted October 2, 2012 (edited) yes, you would have to pay people to develop this network of tech. it doesnt happen overnight. eventually some labor would become obsolete... it's as simple as that. im not sure we have a choice, the environment will check are behavior at some point... It always does and always has. It was the central theme of most of Robert Malthus' work. And humanity has always organically solved these problems through a combination of natural attrition and market driven solutions which have responded to the wants and needs of the population. Furthermore, the reason this system exists is because it reflects what being human actually means. And yes, distopia. As I stated earlier, nothing can ever be free. Edited October 2, 2012 by TakeYouToTasker
MARCELL DAREUS POWER Posted October 2, 2012 Author Posted October 2, 2012 It always does and always has. It was the central theme of most of Robert Malthus' work. And humanity has always organically solved these problems through a combination of natural attrition and market driven solutions which have responded to the wants and needs of the population. Furthermore, the reason this system exists is because it reflects what being human actually means. And yes, distopia. As I stated earlier, nothing can ever be free. I agree man, in a scarce environment, market solutions are the best with some caveots. but how would a capitalist system bring about something that makes no profit? i guess thats the problem... the idea of transition yes, if no human labor is required, then why would you pay for it?
TakeYouToTasker Posted October 2, 2012 Posted October 2, 2012 (edited) I agree man, in a scarce environment, market solutions are the best with some caveots. but how would a capitalist system bring about something that makes no profit? i guess thats the problem... the idea of transition yes, if no human labor is required, then why would you pay for it? Profit is not evil. It is the basic human motivator that has evolved over millions of years of human history as an alternative to violence and threat. Free men have the right to exchange their labor for an agreed apon wage. The purchaser of that labor has the right to combine that labor with other purchased labor and resources in order to create a service or product which others wish to freely exchange for. Any value over and above the cost to him of the labor units and resources he freely exchanged for are justly his own. Edited October 2, 2012 by TakeYouToTasker
MARCELL DAREUS POWER Posted October 2, 2012 Author Posted October 2, 2012 (edited) Profit is not evil. It is the basic human motivator that has evolved over millions of years of human history as an alternative to violence and threat. Free men have the right to exchange their labor for an agreed apon wage. The purchaser of that labor has the right to combine that labor with other purchased labor and resources in order to create a service or product which others wish to freely exchange for. Any value over and above the cost to him of the labor units and resources he freely exchanged for are justly his own. well, profit in some cases is bad... but yeah, most of the time it's a great incentive. i agree with all this. free exchange, limited red tape, common sense regs...etc... yeah... the problem is globalization is different. and resources are not infinite and there is no such thing as infinite growth with limited fuel/minerals/purchasing power... many states are autocratic, creating a huge advantage against labor in other markets... ie sweat shops. debt crisis is a necessary evil in this system and it's very unstable. again, we are 5 percent of the pop using close to 30% of the energy resources. that is not sustainable. why do you think the middle east is on fire and we have an interest over there? i would also argue that profit is a huge motivation to also do things we hate, like take **** jobs... but for me, i would learn philosohy for free or minimal value... if i had free food, energy, thats how i would spend my time... freely.. thats the point of tech, it frees us from unwanted labor, creates more efficient, stable systems. but it's not a utopia... lol Edited October 2, 2012 by MARCELL DAREUS POWER
MARCELL DAREUS POWER Posted October 2, 2012 Author Posted October 2, 2012 not to mention the federal reserve is basically free money for banks and the financial elite... (ie, we are not in a free market). the game is rigged.
TakeYouToTasker Posted October 2, 2012 Posted October 2, 2012 (edited) well, profit in some cases is bad... but yeah, most of the time it's a great incentive. i agree with all this. free exchange, limited red tape, common sense regs...etc... yeah... the problem is globalization is different. and resources are not infinite and there is no such thing as infinite growth with limited fuel/minerals/purchasing power... many states are autocratic, creating a huge advantage against labor in other markets... ie sweat shops. debt crisis is a necessary evil in this system and it's very unstable. again, we are 5 percent of the pop using close to 30% of the energy resources. that is not sustainable. why do you think the middle east is on fire and we have an interest over there? i would also argue that profit is a huge motivation to also do things we hate, like take **** jobs... but for me, i would learn philosohy for free or minimal value... if i had free food, energy, thats how i would spend my time... freely.. thats the point of tech, it frees us from unwanted labor No, debt is not necessary in a capitalist system. It's necessary in our current system which is anything but market driven. Under capitalism real savings and capital formation drive the engine. As to our foreign policy initiatives geared towards "protecting American interests", those aren't the least bit capitalistic either. Businesses that wish to opperate in other areas of the world should be free to do so, but at their own cost and own peril; not by using our military presence as a defacto subsidy used to generate private profits. As to the reality of finite resources, what's you point? Edited October 2, 2012 by TakeYouToTasker
MARCELL DAREUS POWER Posted October 2, 2012 Author Posted October 2, 2012 (edited) No, debt is not necessary in a capitalist system. It's necessary in our current system which is anything but market driven. Under capitalism real savings and capital formation drive the engine. As to our foreign policy initiatives geared towards "protecting American interests", those aren't the least bit capitalistic either. Businesses that wish to opperate in other areas of the world should be free to do so, but at their own cost and own peril; not by using our military presence as a defacto subsidy used to generate private profits. As to the reality of finite resources, what's you point? in any of these systems, communism, anarchism, capitalism, socialism, you need a monetary system, ie debt to create money. thats how banking works.... you need labor to accumulate profit, and profit to accumulate resources. all of this means debt is necessary. otherwise money wouldnt exist... this is very outdated in many aspects of our technical knowledge now. not all, but lots of labor could be made obsolete. there are tons of social/psychological problems with this monetary system that are disturbing... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=prcu7sjjg_Y&feature=related here is another good video... Edited October 2, 2012 by MARCELL DAREUS POWER
TakeYouToTasker Posted October 2, 2012 Posted October 2, 2012 (edited) Good Lord... Money isn't "created" in a capitalist system. It is simply a marker representitive of actual wealth, and a lubricant of economic activity. Money simply means that we never have to decide how many chickens a Volvo is worth, which makes exchange unburdensome, and therefor grants labor value and creates a desire for increased productivity. As to banking institutions, you need to stop strawmaning and come to realize that centralized fractional reserve banking is not synonymous with banking in general. If you'd like to fill your head with something useful, step away from Hamiltonian banking theory and do some research into the Free Banking Era that arose under Andrew Jackson. I'm coming to realize that you are lacking a good deal of foundational knowledge, which is why you're endorsing broken utopian philosophy. Edited October 2, 2012 by TakeYouToTasker
MARCELL DAREUS POWER Posted October 2, 2012 Author Posted October 2, 2012 (edited) Good Lord... Money isn't "created" in a capitalist system. It is simply a marker representitive of actual wealth, and a lubricant of economic activity. Money simply means that we never have to decide how many chickens a Volvo is worth, which makes exchange unburdensome, and therefor grants labor value and creates a desire for increased productivity. As to banking institutions, you need to stop strawmaning and come to realize that centralized fractional reserve banking is no synonymous with banking in general. If you'd like to fill your head with something useful, step away from Hamiltonian banking theory and do some research into the Free Banking Era that arose under Andrew Jackson. I'm coming to realize that you are lacking a good deal of foundational knowledge, which is why you're endorsing broken utopian philosophy. first of all, there is no such thing as a utopian society. so please stop saying that. humans are not perfect. but we can make improvements.. secondly, yes, money has helped us get out of a barter system... i think we all know that tasker. the problem is, in our current system, money is created out of debt. Edited October 2, 2012 by MARCELL DAREUS POWER
MARCELL DAREUS POWER Posted October 2, 2012 Author Posted October 2, 2012 (edited) please stop the ad hom attacks and lets discuss the ideas. from my understanding austrian economics is bankrupt, as a finite money supply backed by gold would severly limit the ability of people to gain wealth. ( and would hinder the ability of an economy to recover, e.g. great depression)... among various other problems. in a private market, some banks might start handing out bank notes not backed by gold, which happened millions of times for centuries. only back then, they would hang the banker.... now we just bail them out... it's a very unstable system... again, the solution is not a monetary system, its creating abundance of resources and tech... the problem is scarcity... thats why there is so much conflict generally speaking... e.g. crisis with iran right now... our problems are not about political difference. in reality, they are technical problems... but people dont view it that way. thats why there are so many different laws, because we havent solved them technically... ( especially in contract law) . Edited October 2, 2012 by MARCELL DAREUS POWER
Recommended Posts