Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It hasn't ever been true! Serious magical and dogmatic thinking. I'd take the time to prove you wrong if I wasn't so sure it would be a waste.
OK, we're done here, now go watch Hunger Games again. Maybe if you keep watching it, it will come true. Meanwhile when we both die, people will be employed and working, as always, and the robots will not have taken over, and Judgment Day will still be in the future, and John Connor will not yet be born, and everything will be just fine! There is no fate, but what we make for ourselves...
If no one does any useful work, where are the "resources and wealth" going to come from? Unless you are talking about living in some sort of "tropical paradise" where food is available from wild plants that don't require any human care, even there the "wealth" would be limited. Or are you thinking that robots will start to do all the work eventually? If the latter, the robots will still need to be programmed, maintained, etc.
You're not thinking from the right perspective. With a basic income, people are allowed, encouraged, and paid to work. Or volunteer.
The main question is, if businesses do not have a profit motive to pay workers, what then? How is our society supposed to even function? It takes a total paradigm shift.
It's a sliding scale of course. I don't believe there will be a time where there are 0 workers, even in a very distant future. But 100,000 jobs in a country with a population of 320 million... yikes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Paolella
OK, we're done here, now go watch Hunger Games again. Maybe if you keep watching it, it will come true. Meanwhile when we both die, people will be employed and working, as always, and the robots will not have taken over, and Judgment Day will still be in the future, and John Connor will not yet be born, and everything will be just fine! There is no fate, but what we make for ourselves...
You are just full of opinions and quips, aren't you? Agree to disagree, but don't **** on people for discussing a potential disastrous world event AKA making our own fate (sound familiar?). OK? I'm an excellent driver, but I still wear a seatbelt.
Last edited by Haksel257; 03-21-2016 at 06:04 PM..
How did the people who orchestrated the RE bubble and made millions and billions get their money? Where did it come from? Did they create it? Did they earn it? How about the guys getting rich off frivolous patent lawsuits? Or creating offshore accounts? Gaming regulations to eliminate competition? Lobbying congress?
They are all getting rich by doing *harm* to our economy and society. And yet I don't see you being bothered by this *theft*. No, you are worried about taxes and wealth redistribution, which are easily proven to be a necessary part of a consumer-capitalist society.
The RE bubble was caused and orchestrated by government interference in the market. So focus now, and look only at causation. Your collectivist leftist government, through interference in banking and commerce, CAUSED THE ENTIRE MESS. If you don't want the mess, you need to get rid of the cause: Big Government.
And from a moral standpoint, redistribution is wrong, evil, and disgusting. And its proponents have a twisted view of life steeped in envy and hatred of the good for being the good. Redistribution is not about compassion, it is about punishment. Taking from one to give to another AGAINST HIS WILL. It is categorically bankrupt, and if you support it, you support the destruction of virtue and all that is good about humanity.
We're done? You never started, Marc. You haven't bothered to produce any substantive arguments or data to support your beliefs.
I am not playing Rise of the Machines in order to cater to your flights of fancy. I consider it enabling and I don't want you to sink any further into the depths of cataclysmic REM.
The RE bubble was caused and orchestrated by government interference in the market. So focus now, and look only at causation. Your collectivist leftist government, through interference in banking and commerce, CAUSED THE ENTIRE MESS. If you don't want the mess, you need to get rid of the cause: Big Government.
And from a moral standpoint, redistribution is wrong, evil, and disgusting. And its proponents have a twisted view of life steeped in envy and hatred of the good for being the good. Redistribution is not about compassion, it is about punishment. Taking from one to give to another AGAINST HIS WILL. It is categorically bankrupt, and if you support it, you support the destruction of virtue and all that is good about humanity.
REDISTRIBUTION IS EVIL!
I was going to kind of ignore you from here on, but are you serious with this? It's like reading a propaganda newspaper. I don't think all rich people are bad. A lot of hard work and smarts, a lot of benefit to society. But you act like dollars are "goodness points". I don't think I can even properly argue with you at this point.
The RE bubble was caused and orchestrated by government interference in the market. So focus now, and look only at causation. Your collectivist leftist government, through interference in banking and commerce, CAUSED THE ENTIRE MESS. If you don't want the mess, you need to get rid of the cause: Big Government.
And from a moral standpoint, redistribution is wrong, evil, and disgusting. And its proponents have a twisted view of life steeped in envy and hatred of the good for being the good. Redistribution is not about compassion, it is about punishment. Taking from one to give to another AGAINST HIS WILL. It is categorically bankrupt, and if you support it, you support the destruction of virtue and all that is good about humanity.
REDISTRIBUTION IS EVIL!
I've read a biography of Jack London. He was big into socialism. He had been a laborer at $1 a day for 10 hr days. No social safety net.
If you don't have redistribution then you have economic stagnation as it is the nature of wealthy people to accumulate wealth. Some ways of doing this cause economic contraction. Some ways of accumulating wealth benefit all. Limiting growth on the top end or limiting that growth to ways that benefit all, benefit all.
The wealth of the middle was been transferred to the top and is being transferred. So if wealth redistribution is so bad then that should be stopped.
I've read a biography of Jack London. He was big into socialism. He had been a laborer at $1 a day for 10 hr days. No social safety net.
If you don't have redistribution then you have economic stagnation as it is the nature of wealthy people to accumulate wealth. Some ways of doing this cause economic contraction. Some ways of accumulating wealth benefit all. Limiting growth on the top end or limiting that growth to ways that benefit all, benefit all.
The wealth of the middle was been transferred to the top and is being transferred. So if wealth redistribution is so bad then that should be stopped.
Incorrect premise. Wealth is earned and owned, it does not appear out of thin air. Wealth is private property and not to be collected or redistributed against one's will. Poverty is an individual problem to be solved by the individual who decides that he has insufficient funds.
If one accumulates wealth it is his to keep or dispose of as he sees fit. Saving one's money is not a crime to be punished by stealing it and lavishing it on those who didn't earn it.
I reject all social contracts or obligations. All men are free and should be free to earn any wealth they want without having it stolen by those who claim they need it. Need is not a moral claim. Need simply means you have a problem to solve. All relationships and economic behavior must be based on trade for mutual benefit, not coercion and compulsion.
The "benefit of all " is not the controlling concept. Private property and freedom are the controlling concepts.
The needs of the many DO NOT outweigh the needs of the few, or the one. Because I may need something does not create a right or make others my slaves. I may ask for help, I may not demand it, and it is not due me, nor is it owed me.
We need to observe common courtesy in this free country of ours. And that starts with abolition of the altruist-collectivist mentality that need is a claim and thieves have a right to steal what they cannot earn.
And those who point to cronys who take advantage of crony capitalism should be advocating for small government that is not involved in commerce at all. You can't corrupt something that controls nothing.
Billionaires do not work, yet they are rich. The simple solution is to make it easy for new innovators to enter profitable closed fields like finance, medicine etc. A new and open stock trading system where people can participate directly, the ending of central banking and the encouragement of peer to peer lending will allow the average person to get unearned income just like the elites. It is true that simple minded low IQ breeders need work to keep them busy but many of us do not need a job to be productive and innovative. I believe that technology improves more when people have more free time and are not forced to work dead end jobs to pay BIg Brother.
I love the combination of condescension (simple minded low IQ breeders) and the juxtaposition with the privileged elite that I'm a member of seeing as how I earn unearned income.
Incorrect premise. Wealth is earned and owned, it does not appear out of thin air. Wealth is private property and not to be collected or redistributed against one's will. Poverty is an individual problem to be solved by the individual who decides that he has insufficient funds.
If one accumulates wealth it is his to keep or dispose of as he sees fit. Saving one's money is not a crime to be punished by stealing it and lavishing it on those who didn't earn it.
I reject all social contracts or obligations. All men are free and should be free to earn any wealth they want without having it stolen by those who claim they need it. Need is not a moral claim. Need simply means you have a problem to solve. All relationships and economic behavior must be based on trade for mutual benefit, not coercion and compulsion.
The "benefit of all " is not the controlling concept. Private property and freedom are the controlling concepts.
The needs of the many DO NOT outweigh the needs of the few, or the one. Because I may need something does not create a right or make others my slaves. I may ask for help, I may not demand it, and it is not due me, nor is it owed me.
We need to observe common courtesy in this free country of ours. And that starts with abolition of the altruist-collectivist mentality that need is a claim and thieves have a right to steal what they cannot earn.
And those who point to cronys who take advantage of crony capitalism should be advocating for small government that is not involved in commerce at all. You can't corrupt something that controls nothing.
I go to work, I pay rent, my landlord hangs around the house all day, he gets wealth without working.
Voila, wealth appeared out of thin air.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
We're done? You never started, Marc. You haven't bothered to produce any substantive arguments or data to support your beliefs.
