Dem Debates

[TheBiznessTZ]

Originally Posted by Lune [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You guys know how efficient nature is, and that efficiency is what made market capitalism such a magnificent system to carry humanity through industrialization.

Also consider how fucking disgusting and depraved nature is. Consider the Coot, which is a duck-like waterbird. Coots will lay far more eggs than they could ever possibly feed, under the assumption that predators will eat some of them. Oftentimes, that doesn't happen, and 10-12 little coots will hatch that the parents can't feed. Over the next few weeks, when some of the coots ask for food, the parents will peck them. The weakest coots get pecked with increasing aggression until their parents either peck them to death, or they stop asking for food and slowly starve to death. This will occur until only enough young coots remain for the parents to feed, sometimes as little as 2-3.

This sickening brutality is universal in nature. Primates will team up and murder social outcasts and the weak. Baby birds will push their weaker siblings out of the nest. Starving bears will eat their extra cubs. Male ruminants will spar for a mate to the point of exhaustion or injury. The winner mates, the vulnerable loser is eaten by a predator.

This system facilitated biological evolution, which is ultimately an efficient and necessary process. But when you start applying human morality and utilitarianism to this, it begins to unravel a little. Humans have the capacity and the impetus to minimize harm at the cost of some of nature's depravity, and also some of its efficiency. Consider this:

The free market approach to the case of coots is business as usual; the natural, efficient order of things. Lay a surplus of eggs to hedge against predation, and cull the weak in order to survive. Sacrifice no growth or competitiveness for the sake of "humanity".

But the miracle of humanity is the capacity for abstract thought, and therefore abstract policy, providing a new approach, government. It brings the ability to make a rule: Coots may now only incubate as many eggs as they have the capacity to feed. Now, yes, you have a higher chance of any given coot losing all of their eggs to predators. Evolution and growth are now moderately less efficient. However, you no longer commit wanton murder and savagery at the opening of every new generation.

I would contend that while capitalism was a necessary and beneficial medium for the conveyance of civilization from primitive civilization to industrialization, its usefulness has diminished. As technology makes society exponentially more productive, and scarcity of resources becomes less an issue, we have the luxury of protecting human life from being ground to pulp by the economic machine. I think many places have already realized this (Denmark, Germany, Australia, etc), as their functional and highly effective governments create policy that make human life safer and more enjoyable, sometimes at the cost of efficiency.

And guess what? Does their entire society implode? Does everybody stop working and stay home and live off neetbux? No. They continue to pull ahead of places like the USA that are stuck in the industrial age with an industrial mindset. In many ways, the United States is, therefore, still a developing nation. Consider a world where we've managed to automate resource production and the vast majority of our services. Do you still think every human still needs to work 40 hours a week to drive consumption, profits, and capitalist machinery? What happens when artificial intelligence exists, and scarcity is no longer a thing? Is the free market still relevant? If so, how can you say that it's just as relevant now, as it was 100 years ago, with how productive we are? Can you even consider that maybe it's time to begin the transition and rethink the way we do things?

Of course, all of this depends on a sophisticated culture with respect for the rule of law, hard work, etc etc, and culture goes a long way toward explaining differences between denmark / USA / nigeria etc, but that's another discussion.

Just read all posts in this thread. Just wanted to quote the best post made.

[SamwiseRed]

im voting for obama personally

[iruinedyourday]

Originally Posted by Lune [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Maybe you're right, but this is the country that went with Bush over Gore, and Bush over Kerry, that idolizes Ronald Reagan, and genuinely believes Socialism is an evil Soviet cult full of people who wear red and want to eliminate all private enterprise.

When the older generations die shit will change. USA will shift left. Politically we've always lagged behind Europe by about a generation, don't forget we're not just progressing for ourselves but for the South too.

hehe yea I agree with you pretty much 100% but with the state of the republican party as it is since bush swooped that election (mind you arguably by devious means and perhaps by a conceding of Gore at the end, rather than by an actual electoral vote) I think that it wont happen again, until the party has a complete and total reorg. Thankfully [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I would also like to say again, the post Gasso quoted on the top of this page is fantastic [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Orruar]

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

If this guy became president, we'd get shit over by the rest of the world. Dude can't even stand up to a couple ignorant children.

[Pokesan]

What should he have done, had them arrested?

[Messie]

Originally Posted by Orruar [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

If this guy became president, we'd get shit over by the rest of the world. Dude can't even stand up to a couple ignorant children.

Please take a moment to look at this situation and his response from an unbiased position.

[sOurDieSel]

Originally Posted by Pokesan [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

What should he have done, had them arrested?

Yes or at least tell them to kick rocks and throw them off the stage.

Would he have let a bunch of White Tea Party members do that with no repercussions? Don't think so...double standards much.

Just shows the dude is spineless either way. Headline is right them BT-1000s put on strap ons and bent Bernie over the podium just like Putin, China and the rest of the world would do while Bernie is cowering in the corner trying to fight the biggest threat to National Security.... CLIMATE CHANGE. rofl

[Pokesan]

It's a bit of a stretch to assume Sanders would interact with Putin the same way he interacts with domestic protestors.

As for the tea party thing - not all speech is equally valuable [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[MrSparkle001]

Originally Posted by Lune [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You guys know how efficient nature is, and that efficiency is what made market capitalism such a magnificent system to carry humanity through industrialization.

Also consider how fucking disgusting and depraved nature is. Consider the Coot, which is a duck-like waterbird. Coots will lay far more eggs than they could ever possibly feed, under the assumption that predators will eat some of them. Oftentimes, that doesn't happen, and 10-12 little coots will hatch that the parents can't feed. Over the next few weeks, when some of the coots ask for food, the parents will peck them. The weakest coots get pecked with increasing aggression until their parents either peck them to death, or they stop asking for food and slowly starve to death. This will occur until only enough young coots remain for the parents to feed, sometimes as little as 2-3.

This sickening brutality is universal in nature. Primates will team up and murder social outcasts and the weak. Baby birds will push their weaker siblings out of the nest. Starving bears will eat their extra cubs. Male ruminants will spar for a mate to the point of exhaustion or injury. The winner mates, the vulnerable loser is eaten by a predator.

This system facilitated biological evolution, which is ultimately an efficient and necessary process. But when you start applying human morality and utilitarianism to this, it begins to unravel a little. Humans have the capacity and the impetus to minimize harm at the cost of some of nature's depravity, and also some of its efficiency. Consider this:

The free market approach to the case of coots is business as usual; the natural, efficient order of things. Lay a surplus of eggs to hedge against predation, and cull the weak in order to survive. Sacrifice no growth or competitiveness for the sake of "humanity".

But the miracle of humanity is the capacity for abstract thought, and therefore abstract policy, providing a new approach, government. It brings the ability to make a rule: Coots may now only incubate as many eggs as they have the capacity to feed. Now, yes, you have a higher chance of any given coot losing all of their eggs to predators. Evolution and growth are now moderately less efficient. However, you no longer commit wanton murder and savagery at the opening of every new generation.

I would contend that while capitalism was a necessary and beneficial medium for the conveyance of civilization from primitive civilization to industrialization, its usefulness has diminished. As technology makes society exponentially more productive, and scarcity of resources becomes less an issue, we have the luxury of protecting human life from being ground to pulp by the economic machine. I think many places have already realized this (Denmark, Germany, Australia, etc), as their functional and highly effective governments create policy that make human life safer and more enjoyable, sometimes at the cost of efficiency.

And guess what? Does their entire society implode? Does everybody stop working and stay home and live off neetbux? No. They continue to pull ahead of places like the USA that are stuck in the industrial age with an industrial mindset. In many ways, the United States is, therefore, still a developing nation. Consider a world where we've managed to automate resource production and the vast majority of our services. Do you still think every human still needs to work 40 hours a week to drive consumption, profits, and capitalist machinery? What happens when artificial intelligence exists, and scarcity is no longer a thing? Is the free market still relevant? If so, how can you say that it's just as relevant now, as it was 100 years ago, with how productive we are? Can you even consider that maybe it's time to begin the transition and rethink the way we do things?

[b]Of course, all of this depends on a sophisticated culture with respect for the rule of law, hard work, etc etc, and culture goes a long way toward explaining differences between denmark / USA / nigeria etc, but that's another discussion.[b]

The bold part at the end is what's important. Are those countries plagued with people who don't contribute to the system but instead leech off it, sometimes for generations? That's the problem with the US, and it's a cultural problem. They don't want to move away from a welfare existence. It happens in urban cities, in rural trailer parks, in our deserts etc. Too many people just don't give a shit.

Bernie wants to model the US after the nordic socialist systems. Well guess what, it won't work here.

I am not saying the gross wealth inequality doesn't contribute. It's plain wrong for .1% of the population to own nearly 90% of the wealth. Oh, and raising the minimum wage to like $15/hr isn't the answer. A massive, radical cultural change is the answer, and I fear we won't see it in our lifetimes.

[Lune]

Originally Posted by MrSparkle001 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The bold part at the end is what's important. Are those countries plagued with people who don't contribute to the system but instead leech off it, sometimes for generations? That's the problem with the US, and it's a cultural problem. They don't want to move away from a welfare existence. It happens in urban cities, in rural trailer parks, in our deserts etc. Too many people just don't give a shit.

Bernie wants to model the US after the nordic socialist systems. Well guess what, it won't work here.

I am not saying the gross wealth inequality doesn't contribute. It's plain wrong for .1% of the population to own nearly 90% of the wealth. Oh, and raising the minimum wage to like $15/hr isn't the answer. A massive, radical cultural change is the answer, and I fear we won't see it in our lifetimes.

You're right and that's why I included that part in there. One thing I want to point out though is the extent to which critics of welfare totally fabricate the nature of a 'welfare class'. It just doesn't exist the way fiscal conservatives tend to envision it. The image of a 'welfare queen' totally overpowers the narrative and twists it away from the reality of the situation, which is that life with welfare in the US is a miserable existence that nobody aspires to, not even your biggest, fattest, saddest, most desperate lowlifes, and native citizens don't tend to build their goals and aspirations in life around the availability of welfare bucks.

I'm curious to see what happens in Germany, with a robust system of welfare, including BASIC FUCKING INCOME for young people. How will they handle this wave of welfare-seeking Syrian immigrants. Will the Syrians become culturally German, integrate, and become productive citizens? Were they really just looking for welfare, intending to milk Germany's benefits? Can a compassionate economic system with generous welfare turn a backwards culture into a progressive one?