 |
| |
|
| |
|
|
chegitz guevara
|
 |
Ft. Lauderdale, FL Communist Party of Apolyton
Jun 2000
time: 00:35
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Flubber
Kid
My problem with your society was summed up in my experience with a union environment. After about 30 minutes working in a store, the manager called me in and told me to slow down. The central planners at head office had given him a certain staff allocation and if the work was done too quickly, he might lose his staffing quota (his fear is that someone from head office might come by and see all the shelves stocked with hours to go). |
Better that than the opposite, being forced to work so fast you burn out and have to quit (such as happens in meat packing plants or UPS). Obviously, we'd prefer a happy medium.
Interestingly, the fact that you are disgusted by it shows the lie to an oft repeated mistruth, that people are inherently lazy. Yes, we are, but we also like to work. Nothing is worse than having nothing to do and having all day to do it (okay, maybe being staked to a red ant mound is worse).
We are creative and laboring creatures. We made ourselves this way, because it was a superior method of procuring food. Those humans that were more creative and worked harder were more likely to increase their numbers, and we evolved over millions of years through this process.
That doesn't mean there aren't those that seek to minimze the amount of work they do, but there are ways to deal with that. A large part of the problem is laziness, but not all of it. I would say an equally large part of the problem is that people feel alienated from their work, don't have any input, don't get any reward, and thus don't have any stake in success.
This, of course, is the criticism leveled against socialism. No carrot and no stick, but this is as far as I'm going in this post. I need to finish sending out resumes and I want to play a little Civ. Later. 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Flubber
|
|
With a view of the Rockies
Aug 2000
time: 22:35
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Better that than the opposite, being forced to work so fast you burn out and have to quit (such as happens in meat packing plants or UPS). Obviously, we'd prefer a happy medium.
|
Yes
quote:
Originally posted by chegitz guevara
That doesn't mean there aren't those that seek to minimze the amount of work they do, but there are ways to deal with that. A large part of the problem is laziness, but not all of it. I would say an equally large part of the problem is that people feel alienated from their work, don't have any input, don't get any reward, and thus don't have any stake in success.
This, of course, is the criticism leveled against socialism. No carrot and no stick, but this is as far as I'm going in this post. I need to finish sending out resumes and I want to play a little Civ. Later. |
Yes yes yes
I don't tend to think people are inherently lazy. Take my native area of Newfoundland-- If you asked friends over to lay sod or build a fence or jackhamer some old concrete, they would bust a gut. hard working folks all.
Give those folks a system ( in this case unemployment insurance) that rewarded working for a certain number of weeks and colecting benefits for the rest and they were doing it in a second. There were whole communities where the entire economy was directed at earning benefits. If anyone wanted to work beyond the required benefits qualification period . . . well that was unthinkable.
So hardworking folks when working for nothing-- would work a system imposed by the government to get maximum benefit at minimum effort-- thats what I grew up seeing-- the contradiction was always striking to me.
Its fine for those folks if thats what they want--I just wanted more income and more stuff for myself so I worked harder and got out. I've worked hard for the last 10 years (and lets not forget the 7 years of education where I spent money instead of earning it) . . . most of those folks have worked 12-14 weeks a year-- so about 1/4 as much as me. Is it fair to take my stuff and give it to them?? remember we grew up in the same small town, went to the same school and were not appreciably wealthier than anyone else.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Flubber
|
|
With a view of the Rockies
Aug 2000
time: 22:35
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by GePap
And all these threads are a lark, cause eventually, we will end up in a society closer to what Marx envisioned than what anyone in this thread thinks we will look like.
He who laughs last.... |
How so??
If you mean that standards for workers in western democracies are already higher than he imagined, I would guess you would be right.
I don't see any problem with it. I don't want any part of the early growing pains of capitalism and am perfectly happy in the current model where workers are free to vote or unionize, change jobs etc etc. That stuff is all good.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Velociryx
|
 |
of Candle'Bre
Apr 1999
time: 05:35
|
|
Flubber, my friend, you and me....we would fall into what would be called the "Capitalist-Pig-Dog Group." and in truth, we'd be lucky to survive the Revolution/Counter-Revolution festivities.
If we did, I'm sure our enlightened masters would consider it quite "fair enough" that we were allowed to continue to draw a breath (if they were even that charitable...which would be very much up in the air).
Assuming we did get to live tho....we'd be second class citizens, almost certainly. (Maybe fourth class citizens....Planners (elite party members), Party Members, Non-Party Members, Surviving Capitalist-Pig-Dogs?) And subject to greater-than-the-normal invasions of privacy so that the Great Fathers could check up on us and ensure that we weren't trying to reinvent the banned system and/or willingly exploit each other to begin to get ahead, and thus, style ourselves as the new elite.
All that to say...I wouldn't bet on getting a tuition refund or keeping your house. 
-=Vel=-
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Flubber
|
|
With a view of the Rockies
Aug 2000
time: 22:35
|
|
Vel
read my post before yours-- if they give me whats fair retroactively , by their Kid's own definitions, I could have too sweet a life to leave.
Well at least I would wait until I had completed my stint of blatant and useless consumption
vel you do understand that Mrs. Flubber and little Flubber are coming on this trip too. To be "fair" please feel free to bring along the companion of your choice
Now Vel-- are we agreed our island will be a democracy? the first order should be a name . . . you're the writer so I would defer to you if you wish etc etc.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
David Floyd
|
|
The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Jan 1970
time: 05:35
|
|
Vel,
Well, while I generally agree with you on most points, we're far apart on the question of democracy.
quote:
I agree with nearly everything in your last post, save for (of course) the last bit re: dictatorship, because for the life of me, I CANNOT get my brain to accept that a dictator knows better than a representative of my choosing what is best for me, and that's really what it comes down to. |
Why should a dictator OR a representative be able to decide "what is best for you"? Isn't that what you've been arguing against for the past 800 posts? You're the only one who should decide what is best for you.
My view of government is that it's powers should be strongly limited, to the degree where the government simply acts to protect the individual from coercion (yes, a couple of other things, but all stemming from that main concern). In that context, it's irrelevant whether the head of state calls himself "Comrade" or "President", and whether he is elected or rules by the Divine Right of Kings, because his power to impose his will on you is non-existent.
Now, the natural objection is that a dictator could simply order the army to enforce his will. Ignoring the point that it would impossible, in my system, to afford a standing army large enough to do so, the system is also governed by checks and balances. What's to stop President Bush from ordering the army to crush the Democrats? Well, theoretically he could, I suppose, but the American system was, and is, designed to prevent that. I doubt the military would even obey such an order.
Now, I'm not going to flesh out my preferred system much more than that, but the point I'm making is simply that if you find a way to limit the power of the government, then the method of selection for the head of state and the people in the government is irrelevant. Naturally, finding a way to limit the government's power is the hard part, but assuming that power can be limited enough, then the "democracy vs. dictator" argument becomes sorta irrelevant, in my opinion.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
David Floyd
|
|
The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Jan 1970
time: 05:35
|
|
But if the choice is between a small government run by a dictator, and a large government run by "the people" (democracy, as it were), I'll pick the small government every time. My impression is that you would pick the large democracy, but I could be wrong.
In any case, does this island have naked native women?
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Flubber
|
|
With a view of the Rockies
Aug 2000
time: 22:35
|
|
Liberty has a nice sound as long as I can name a landmark or two with appropriate salutes to communism.
Its little Flubber-- 15 months old-- he loves the water so as long as there is a beach anywhere on the island, he'll be happy for the next few years. Mrs Flubber is a nurse so thats covered as well as we can.
Now if we adopt the US constitution, I fear that I may have to disqualify myself as president unless we amend it somewhat to refer to citizens of Liberty LOL.
Oh and where is the stuff about the electoral college -- cause that would have to go as well
To david Floyd
Good points. You represent the other extreme of the political spectrum and I actually have less quarrel with your views than those I have been fighting here.
I guess I just accept a greater responsibility on citizens toward their fellow citizens. I don't say that your views are wrong, just that I am willing to accept greater restrictions than you are in the name of creating a society.
edit -used the wrong word
|
|
| |
|
|
|
David Floyd
|
|
The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Jan 1970
time: 05:35
|
|
Vel,
quote:
I would, because I don't like being dictated to... |
That's my point, though. If the government has very little power, anyway, it's tough for it to dictate anything to you. On the other hand, if the government has a great deal of power, an elected government can dictate just as easily a king.
Flubber,
quote:
I guess I just accept a greater responsibility on citizens toward their fellow citizens. I don't say that your views are wrong, just that I am willing to accept greater restrictions than you are in the name of creating a society. |
I certainly understand your point. My objection is one of consistency, though - if one is willing to restrict liberty in order to help the poor, for example, then that person has little ground on which to stand on when objecting to what restrictions others want to place on liberty.
In my mind, it's better to let private sources, such as charities, family, friends, churches, etc., help the less fortunate, and also to empower the less fortunate to better themselves, by not restricting their liberty.
If a guy on a streetcorner isn't willing to stock boxes at Walmart - a job that is almost always available - then why should I be forced to subsidize him. There's a saying "God helps those who help themselves", which I would change to read "Those who help themselves don't need the help of others". And when they do, private sources (to say nothing of the person's family) will look more favorably on granting the help that person needs.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
David Floyd
|
|
The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Jan 1970
time: 05:35
|
|
quote:
Well I could respond, but the only discussion I really have interest in is the one between aneeshm and I. |
Is he the only one who doesn't trumpet your inconsistencies?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Flubber
|
|
With a view of the Rockies
Aug 2000
time: 22:35
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by David Floyd
Is he the only one who doesn't trumpet your inconsistencies? |
Probably
Kid hasn't answered a question of mine in about 10 posts. Its probably because he has no clue how his plan could actually be implemented in actual terms. I'm just glad I found the possibility of the chess instructor job. Mrs Flubber might not approve of the cavorting naked females and there are some things I think little Flub shouldn't necessarily be witnessing before he even turns 2.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Flubber
|
|
With a view of the Rockies
Aug 2000
time: 22:35
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kidicious
It is just an enjoyable debate for me. |
ya
I guess you don't enjoy being asked where the unfairness is in people wanting to work less or more at your state-mandated rates.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:35.
Apolyton Time is 00:35. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
24-08-2004 03:20
|